Achieving a sustainable and diversified economy in the Verde Valley

The Verde Valley Forum is produced by The Sedona Academy of Public Affairs Officers: Frank Besnette, President Kent Jones, Vice President, Operations Marshall Whitmire, Vice President, Forums Linda Besnette, Secretary George Tice, Treasurer Jim Eaton, Immediate Past President Executive Committee: The above officers, plus committee chairs: Finance Chair, Gene Holloway Research, Dan Schay Public Information Chair, Jim Eaton Physical Arrangements Chair, Margo Running Participant Selection Chair, Kent Jones Ex-officio members: Judy Adams, Dick Dahl, Steve Hansen, Sandy Moriarty, Bill Pumphrey, Tom Shuman Board of Directors: Rod Abbott, Bob Aberg, Judy Adams, Rainy Atkins, Bea Axline, Ashley Baugh, Frank Besnette, Linda Besnette, Dick Dahl, Kathy Davis, John DiBattista, Paul Domingue, Jim Eaton, Fred Estrella, Judy Feldstein, Jodie Filardo, Louis Getoff, Ben Goldsmith, Cole Greenberg, Steve Hansen, Brenda Hauser, Lisa Hirsch, Gene Holloway, Diane Joens, Kent Jones, Paul Kessel, Bill Kusner, Gayle Mabery, Anita MacFarlane, Joan McClelland, Donna Michaels, Ben Miller, Jane Moore, Sandy Moriarty, Bill Pumphrey, Margo Running, Gozde Sevim, Dan Schay, Harry Schoenberg, Morrey Shifman, Kathy Shriver, Tom Shuman, Jean-Marie Swalm, Alex Thorne, George Tice, Chris Watkins, Marshall Whitmire Research Committee: Dan Schay (chair), Judy Adams, Frank Besnette, Kent Jones, Bill Pumphrey, Marshall Whitmire
Cover Images (panorama and woman birding) contributed by "Beach's On Location" Cottonwood, Arizona www.beachonlocation.com
ACHIEVING A SUSTAINABLE AND DIVERSIFIED ECONOMY IN THE VERDE VALLEY
2004 VERDE VALLEY FORUM
Lodge at Cliff Castle Camp Verde, Arizona February 27-29, 2004
Background Research Report Prepared by
NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY College of Business Administration Bureau of Business & Economic Research Rural Policy Program
A unit of the Bank One Center for Business Outreach Wayne R. Fox Director Joseph J. Walka Editor Authors Ronald J. Gunderson Linda Stratton Joseph J. Walka
SEDONA ACADEMY FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS
January 2004
2004 by Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona. All Rights Reserved.
This report is printed on 10% total recycled fiber, all post-consumer fiber.
ACHIEVING A SUSTAINABLE AND DIVERSIFIED ECONOMY IN THE VERDE VALLEY
"The assumption that economic prosperity requires growth seems so reasonable that most of us don't think much about it...the word `growth` has two fundamentally different meanings: `expansion` and `development.' Expansion means getting bigger; development means getting better, which may or may not involve expansion."
--Michael J. Kinsley Economic Renewal Guide, Rocky Mountain Institute, 1997, p. 1
Sponsorships of the 2004 Verde Valley Forum
Research Report Sponsor Northern Arizona University John D. Haeger, President
Forum Sponsor The City of Cottonwood and The Cottonwood Foundation for Economic Development
Representing Arizona Public Service Coconino County Sedona Red Rock News The Camp Verde Journal Cottonwood Journal Extra
Supervisor Matt Ryan
at Northern Arizona University
Yavapai-Apache Nation Town of Jerome
Jerome Historical Society Jerome Chamber of Commerce Jerome State Park Town of Clarkdale Town of Camp Verde Wells Fargo Bank
A MESSAGE FROM PRESIDENT JOHN D. HAEGER NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY
1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
3
LIST OF MAPS, TABLES, AND FIGURES
4
1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
5
2 GROWTH AND CHANGE IN THE VERDE VALLEY: A DEMOGRAPHIC PORTRAIT OF THE REGION
9
3 THE PRESENT SETTING AND FUTURE IMPLICATIONS
25
4 OPINIONS AND ATTITUDES OF VERDE VALLEY RESIDENTS ON ACHIEVING A SUSTAINABLE, DIVERSIFIED ECONOMY
47
5 VISIONING FOR THE FUTURE
61
6 PLANNING IN THE VALLEY
75
7 SOME ORGANIZATIONAL APPROACHES
99
APPENDIXES
A. Changes in Minority Population in the Verde Valley B. Changes in Age Composition, 1990-2000 C. Employment by Industry in the Verde Valley D. Focus Group Overview E. The Visioning Process F. Resolution to Establish Common Bonds and Principles For Regional Cooperation G. Information on Some Local Economic Development Efforts in Arizona
111 111 113 115 117 119 122 125
SOURCES ABOUT THE AUTHORS
126 128
Office of the President
January 7, 2004 To the Participants in the 2004 Verde Valley Forum: It is a privilege for Northern Arizona University to once again be involved in the Verde Valley Forum, as a financial contributor and through the development of the background research report which you will use in your own deliberations. This year's Forum is the 19th Sedona or Verde Valley Forum held since 1985 and I am proud to note that NAU faculty have participated in all but four of them. This is an important partnership for NAU and I hope that our productive relationship can continue into the future. The town hall or forum process has a long and illustrious history in our country. It is based on community involvement, informed and thoughtful discussion, consensus building, and careful policy analysis and formulation. These processes are essential as we confront new challenges in a new century. And one of our most important challenges is the creation of sustainable and diversified economies within our state, no easy task in a time of rapid and occasionally dramatic change. The work on the background report by my NAU colleagues implements my personal commitment to community outreach and the strengthening of ties between NAU and local communities throughout the state. Stronger ties with the people and the communities of the Verde Valley are a high priority for me you are our closest neighbors and we value your progress. With warm wishes for success,
John D. Haeger President
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
|1
|2
2004 Verde Valley Forum
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Northern Arizona University research team expresses its thanks to the many individuals and organizations that assisted us in developing this Report for the Verde Valley Forum. Numerous people in the Verde Valley region responded cheerfully to our inquiries and provided us with information and data as well as their own insights on the topics for discussion. The research committee of the Sedona Academy, listed in this Report, was most helpful in providing guidance to the team throughout the research effort and other members of the Sedona Academy assisted us in identifying and contacting Focus Group participants. Dan Schay, chair of the research committee, was especially helpful to the team throughout our work. Pat Schweiss of Larson Newspapers and Larson Newspapers provided many of the images used. A. Roy Horn of the Yavapai College Small Business Development Center graciously hosted four of the Focus Groups. Terri Nelson of Yavapai County and Aaron Seifert of the City of Sedona provided the maps of the Verde Valley. Chip Davis, County supervisor, was helpful in providing insights to the region. At NAU, a number of staff were critical to the successful completion of a project of this size. Wayne R. Fox made sure that the needs of the team were addressed quickly and completely. Theresa Stacy-Ryan, the College's publications specialist is responsible for the design and attractiveness of the Report. Sheila Nunnink and the student workers in the Bank One Center worked long and hard on transcribing the Focus Group transcripts in an accurate and timely way. Stewart Hall, our graduate assistant, gathered much of the data and provided professional advice to the team.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
|3
LIST OF MAPS, TABLES, AND FIGURES
2|10 2|12 2|13 2|14 2|15 2|16 2|17 2|18 2|19 2|20 2|21 2|23 2|24 3|28 3|33 3|34 3|35 3|36 3|37 3|38 3|42 3|43 3|45 A|111 A|112 A|113 A|114 A|115 Map 2-1. Verde Valley Area Map Table 2-1. Arizona and Yavapai County Populations Table 2-2. Historical Verde Valley Populations Figure 2-1. Percent Hispanic Population, 2000 Table 2-3. Median Age of Population in 1990 and 2000 Figure 2-2. Median Age of Population in 2000, in years Figure 2-3. Change in Number of Residents Under 5 Years of Age, 1990-2000 Figure 2-4. Change in Number of Residents 5-19 Years of Age, 1990-2000 Figure 2-5. Change in Number of Residents 20-64 Years of Age, 1990-2000 Figure 2-6. Change in Number of Residents 65 Years and Older, 1990-2000 Table 2-4. Income and Poverty Status, 1999 Table 2-5. Language and Educational Attainment, 2000 Table 2-6. Yavapai-Apache Demographic and Economic Profile, 2000 Table 3-1. Population Projections for the Verde Valley, 2010 and 2020 Table 3-2. Changes in the Level of Employment, 1998-2003 Table 3-3. Unemployment Rates, 2003 Table 3-4. Projected Numbers of New Jobs Necessary in 2010 and 2020 Table 3-5. Housing Affordability Gap, 2000 Table 3-6. Seasonal Housing Units, 2000 Map 3-1. Verde Valley Public Lands Map 3-2. Verde Valley Build-out to 1960 Map 3-3. Verde Valley Build-out to 2003 Table 3-7. Sales Tax Revenues Table A-1. Population, Race, and Hispanic Origin, 2000 Table A-2. Change in Hispanic Population, 1990 to 2000 Table B-1. Population by Selected Age Groups, 2000 Table B-2. Population by Selected Age Groups, 1990 Table C-1. Percent of Civilian Population Age 16 & Older by Industry in Unincorporated Areas, 2000 A|116 Table C-2. Percent of Civilian Population Age 16 & Older by Industry Employment in Incorporated Communities, 2000 |4
2004 Verde Valley Forum
1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
"Sustainable development is development that maintains or enhances economic opportunity and community well-being while protecting and restoring the natural environment upon which people and economies depend." --Minnesota Statutes
1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW It is hard to imagine a more timely, important, and relevant topic for the 2004 Verde Valley Forum than Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy in the Verde Valley. For good or ill, the Verde Valley has been out front as Arizona's rapid growth has continued over the last decade or more. Population growth, higher incomes, demands for more government services, greater economic security, more leisure amenities, increased road congestion, and school crowding the Valley has had its share of all of these plusses and minuses of dramatic change. It's no wonder that Verde Valley residents wonder aloud if they are really controlling their common destiny or simply being buffeted about by winds of change and may be swallowed up eventually as the "state of Maricopa" continues its seemingly inexorable expansion in every direction. It's difficult in this kind of changing setting to lay out proactive strategies to maximize the good and mitigate the evils but the Verde Valley Forum has done it twice in the recent past: first in 1999, when the topic was Controlling our Destiny: Regional Planning and Growth Management and then in 2002, when the topic was Implementing a Verde Valley Open Space Plan. The work of participants at these two Forums helps to set the stage for this year's effort and shows, once again, that the people of the Verde Valley will try to plan for and manage their future. This Report attempts to help Forum participants make informed decisions and policy recommendations for the Verde Valley economy. It begins, in Chapter 2, with a description of the Valley not its rolling hills, rivers and streams, flora and fauna, but a description of its people. How many are there? Where do they live? How old are they? How educated? How diverse is the population? What are personal income levels? How do people live? Before we set out on a journey to explore what we want our economy to be, we need to know more about ourselves. This chapter provides some of this information. In Chapter 3, we speculate on where the economic machine of the Verde Valley seems to be headed based on current trends. It's not a static, unchanging economic world in the Valley and this chapter tries
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
1|7
to capture the impacts of current changes, discussing population, employment, and housing trends. With some information in hand on who we are and where we seem to be headed, we can ask where we really want to go. Five focus groups were conducted over the autumn months of 2003 to gather the views of Verde Valley residents on the nature of sustainable and diversified economy for the region and how the region can achieve that goal. The groups' views are summarized in Chapter 4. Chapter 5 builds on the focus group experience and explores the community values of the region, as expressed in various current documents, plans, and policies. It then discusses that most important step a community or region takes as it tries to articulate its community values into a statement of vision. The process of community visioning is explained in detail and examples of vision statements are presented. With values identified and a values-based vision in place, the region can then take on the planning and implementation of activities that support the vision. While the sequence from values to vision to plans to implementation is a neat, linear, and
1|8
2004 Verde Valley Forum
preferred line of action, we know that the world doesn't always work that way. We expect decision-makers to take action in timely ways, even when community values may be unclear and when a clear statement of vision is lacking. A lot of economic planning and implementation has occurred and is occurring in the Valley and Chapter 6 describes some of these activities. The chapter suggests how principled or values-based planning and implementation achieve the community or regional vision. Finally, Chapter 7 describes some organizational approaches that have been used to implement a strategy to create, maintain, and enhance sustainable and diversified regional economies.
2 GROWTH AND CHANGE IN THE VERDE VALLEY: A DEMOGRAPHIC PORTRAIT OF THE REGION
1917 Main Street, Cottonwood, Arizona Main
1963 West Sedona from Airport Mesa, APS 2004 Old Main Street, Cottonwood, Arizona
1993 West Sedona from Airport Mesa, APS 1910 Verde Valley Cement Factory
2004 Phoenix Cement Factory
Cline Library Special Collections and Archives, Northern Arizona University NAU.PH.86.6.16
Cline Library Special Collections and Archives, Northern Arizona University AHS.0506.00031
2 GROWTH AND CHANGE IN THE VERDE VALLEY: A DEMOGRAPHIC PORTRAIT OF THE REGION As we approach the challenge of achieving a sustainable and diversified economy in the Verde Valley, we need to have a good understanding of exactly where we stand today and where we have come from. What does the region look like in terms of its people and their education, jobs, and incomes? What are the differences within the region in terms of these and other characteristics? What changes are occurring that would affect the deliberations and decisions of Forum participants? These are some of the questions addressed in this opening chapter. Farm Belt or Rust Belt, or perhaps the border regions or the coastal regions. As such, no formal boundaries exist, but at the same time, everyone knows what region is being discussed. The Verde Valley region is shown on Map 2-1.
Definition of the Verde Valley For purposes of data collection for this study, we considered the Verde Valley as the land area encompassed by the Mingus Mountain and Verde Census County Divisions (CCD's) that are used by the U.S. Bureau of the Census. We also added the areas within the incorporated boundaries of that portion of the City of Sedona that exists in Coconino County. Using this definition, the Verde Valley includes the incorporated communities of Camp Verde, Clarkdale, Cottonwood, Jerome, and Sedona as well as the builtup areas in Yavapai County that are commonly referred to as Census Designated Places (CDP's). These areas are Big Park, Cornville, CottonwoodVerde Village, and Lake Montezuma. In addition, the Yavapai-Apache Nation is included. Finally, in 2000 there were an additional 3,267 persons residing on other lands within the two Census County Divisions that are not specifically identified with a place name.
2 | 11
Changes in Population
Throughout the latter half of the twentieth century and continuing to the present, Arizona's population has grown steadily and rapidly. In 1940, there were fewer than half a million people in the state (499,261). By 1960, the state's population had more than doubled to 1,302,161. And by 1980, it had doubled again to 2,718,425. Finally, according to the decennial census, Arizona's population was 5,130,632 in the year 2000. Over this extended period of time, Arizona's metropolitan areas mushroomed and the state is now among the most urbanized in the country. In 1940, 52 percent of Arizona's population was urban (Maricopa and Pima counties). By 1960, this had risen to 74.5 percent and in 2000, 88.2 percent of the state's population was urban (see Table 2-1). For purposes of this analysis, urban is defined by the U.S. Bureau of the
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
Definition of the Verde Valley
The phrase "Verde Valley" may mean different things to different people. Because the region does not possess a unique political status, the boundaries of the Verde Valley are not as easy to identify as they are for incorporated cities or counties. In the regional economics literature, the Verde Valley would be classified as an identifiable region to indicate that the general area is quite homogeneous with reference to its economic or geographic features. Nationally, when we think of homogeneous regions, we speak of the
Table 2-1. Arizona and Yavapai County Populations Geographic Area Arizona Population Urban Population Rural Population Percent Urban Population Percent Rural Population Yavapai County Population Yavapai as a Percent of Arizona Population 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2003 (Estimate)
1,302,161 970,616 331,545 74.5 25.5 28,912 2.2
1,775,399 1,408,864 362,036 79.6 20.4 37,005 2.1
2,718,215 2,278,728 439,487 83.8 16.2 68,145 2.5
3,665,228 3,206,973 458,255 87.5 12.5 107,714 2.9
5,130,632 4,523,535 607,097 88.2 11.8 167,517 3.3
5,629,870 n/a n/a n/a n/a 186,885 3.3
decline in rural populations that plague the Dakotas and other areas of the Midwest. There are growing numbers of citizens in rural Arizona who will seek jobs, provide markets, and demand public services.
Sources: U.S. Bureau of the Census (1960-2000). Arizona Department of Economic Security, 2003.
Arizona's rural counties, taken together, have participated in Arizona's rapid population growth and are projected to continue to do so in the future.
Census as encompassing all areas within the Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA's). In Arizona, Maricopa, Pima, Pinal, Yuma, Mohave, and Coconino counties presently are considered MSA's. At the same time, the state's rural population had declined to 11.8 percent of the state's total by 2000. Measured in percentage terms, the urbanization of Arizona is nearly complete and much of this change occurred some time ago. But this trend is not a result of extremely slow growth or decline in the rural areas of the state. Arizona's rural counties, taken together, have participated in Arizona's rapid population growth and are projected to continue to do so in the future. We are not experiencing the patterns of absolute
2004 Verde Valley Forum
Yavapai County is an example of a rural county with a rapidly growing population. Yavapai County's share of the state's population increased rather steadily over the latter half of the last century. Data in Table 2-1 indicate that Yavapai's population was 2.2 percent of the state total in 1960 and it had risen to 3.3 percent as of 2000. Over this 40-year period, Arizona's population increased by 294 percent while Yavapai County population increased by 479 percent. The Arizona Department of Economic Security (DES) is required to provide annual estimates of population for the state, its counties, and the incorporated communities. The estimated 2003 populations for Arizona and Yavapai County are 5,629,870 and 186,885 respectively. According to these estimates, Yavapai continues to contain 3.3 percent of the state's population.
2 | 12
Changes in population within the Verde Valley are shown in Table 2-2. This table shows the growth in the Verde Valley region's incorporated places as well as in the Census Designated Places (CDPs) and in the Yavapai-Apache Nation. The table provides data for the 1980 2000 period as well as for the most current estimates of population (as of July 1, 2003). The table confirms, with "hard" data, what residents of the region experience in traffic jams, construction delays, longer checkout lines, and increased school enrollments. The Verde Valley population is growing! Interestingly, this population growth is spread rather uniformly throughout the Verde Valley. With the exception of Jerome, the cities of the valley and the CDPs are all experiencing significant growth this is not a situation in which there are declines (or outmigration) in certain areas and offsetting increases in others. Table 2-2 shows that populations in Camp Verde, Cottonwood, and Sedona exceeded 10,000 persons by 2003. Clarkdale's population had reached 3,595 by 2003. Among the incorporated communities, only Jerome has declined since 1980, and housed an estimated 330 persons in 2003. Growth has been extremely rapid on the Yavapai-Apache Nation as well. Over the
20 years from 1980 to 2000, Census figures show a 270 percent increase in population from 200 to 743 persons. Growth in the unincorporated areas of the Verde Valley was also evident over the period. Data for these regions are only available for 1990 and 2000 since DES is not required to provide annual estimates in the intercensal years, and in 1980, these
Table 2-2. Historical Verde Valley Populations Geographic Area Verde Valley Incorporated Places Camp Verde Clarkdale Cottonwood Jerome Sedona (overall) Yavapai-Apache Nation Census Designated Places Big Park, CDP Cornville, CDP Cottonwood-Verde Village, CDP Lake Montezuma, CDP Remainder of Verde Valley Population (in Mingus Mountain and Verde CCD's) Total Verde Valley Population
n/a = Not available
Jerome, 1940, looking up the hill just south of the Montana Hotel
Cline Library Special Collections and Archives, Northern Arizona University NAU.PH.435.14
1980
1990
2000
2003 (Estimate)
3,824 1,512 4,550 420 5,319 200 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
6,243 2,144 5,918 403 7,720 618 3,024 2,089 7,037 1,841 2,596 39,633
9,451 3,422 9,179 329 10,192 743 5,245 3,335 10,610 3,344 3,267 59,117
10,095 3,595 10,240 330 10,700 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Sources: U.S. Bureau of the Census (1980-2000). Arizona Department of Economic Security, 2003.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
2 | 13
Figure 2-1. Percent Hispanic Population, 2000
areas outside of the cities and CDP's) also grew by 45 percent during the 1990 2000 period. This suggests that not only are the incorporated communities and the officially recognized unincorporated places in the region increasing in population, but the entirely rural areas of the valley are also growing at an extremely rapid rate.
Status of Minority Population
Persons in the minority population constitute 10 to 20 percent of the total population in most locations throughout the Verde Valley and in Yavapai County. Minority populations in the two Census County Divisions (CCD's) that make up the Verde Valley exceed the percentage for Yavapai County. In Yavapai, 13.4 percent of the population listed themselves as having minority status in 2000. In the Verde Valley, these figures ranged from a high of 24.0 percent in Cottonwood to a low of 9.2 percent in the Coconino portion of Sedona. Native American populations also vary considerably across the Verde Valley. The overall percentage of Native Americans residing in Yavapai County was only 1.6 percent in 2000. However, the percentages of Native Americans vary from 7.3 percent in Camp Verde and 6.8 percent in Clarkdale
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000. Summary Summary File 1.
...not only are the incorporated communities and the officially recognized unincorporated places in the region increasing in population, but the entirely rural areas of the Valley are also growing at an extremely rapid rate.
2 | 14
areas were not large enough to be reported separately in the Census. However, in the 10-year period from 1990 to 2000, population in each of the four CDP's in the region increased by over fifty percent. Lake Montezuma's increase was the largest, experiencing an almost 82 percent increase. It is also interesting to note that the remainder of the Verde Valley region (those
2004 Verde Valley Forum
to a low of 0.4 percent in Big Park and the Yavapai portion of Sedona. Persons of Hispanic origin make up 9.8 percent of the overall Yavapai population, and numbers range from the highest level in Cottonwood where 20.5 percent of population is of Hispanic descent to a low of 6.5 percent in the Coconino portion of Sedona. The Hispanic populations of Camp Verde, Clarkdale, Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP, and the Yavapai portion of Sedona also exceeded the county average in 2000. Figure 2-1 shows the percentage Hispanic population as a percent of total population in each community in 2000. Additional information on the changing nature of the Hispanic population over the 1990 2000 period is also available in Appendix A.
Table 2-3. Median Age of Population in 1990 and 2000 Median Age in years 1990 Median Age in years 2000 Change in Median Age in Years 2000/1990
Geographic Area Yavapai County Big Park CDP Camp Verde town Clarkdale town Cornville CDP Cottonwood city Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP Jerome town Lake Montezuma CDP Sedona city (overall)
42.3 59.4 41.1 41.1 37.5 38.8 42.1 n/a 51.7 52.0
44.5 55.5 42.0 46.0 41.4 41.0 42.0 46.4 44.7 50.5
2.2 -3.9 0.9 4.9 3.9 2.2 -0.1 -7.0 -1.5
Source: U.S. Census Bureau Census 2000 and 1990, Summary File 1 General Population Characteristics
Changes in the Age Distribution and Median Age
The age distribution has undergone interesting changes in the Verde Valley in the 10 years between 1990 and 2000. Overall, the median age increased; however, this figure has increased in some communities and decreased in others. Furthermore, the percentages of persons within various age groups including those less than five years of age, as well as school age children, older
adults, and persons age 65 and over have all moved in different directions among the various communities in the region. Table 2-3 compares the median age of the resident population for 2000 with 1990 for Yavapai County and for the Verde Valley communities. Over this period, the median age in Yavapai County increased by 2.2 years to 44.5 years. Big Park, Clarkdale, Jerome, Lake Montezuma, and Sedona each recorded median age levels exceeding the county average in 2000. However, it is
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
2 | 15
Figure 2-2. Median Age of Population in 2000, in Years
The largest decrease in median age occurred in Lake Montezuma where the median population age decreased by seven years from 51.7 to 44.7 years. Big Park's average age also dropped by 3.9 years, and the average age in Sedona declined 1.5 years to 50.5. All other areas in the region experienced an increase in median age with the exception of the Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP where the median declined a miniscule 0.1 years. Overall, the oldest community in the region is the Big Park CDP with a median age of 55.5 years. Sedona is the only other place where the median age exceeded 50 years (50.5 years in 2000.) See Figure 2-2 for information showing the median population age by community in 2000. The areas with the youngest population in 2000 were Cottonwood and Cornville where the median ages were 41.0 and 41.4 years, respectively. However, the average age in both of these communities has increased significantly since 1990 when each recorded median age levels in the high thirties (38.8 years in Cottonwood and 37.5 years in Cornville). These increases in average age, however, are the result of the in-migration of more working-age families to these communities, and not a greater
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000. Summary Summary File 1. General Population Characteristics.
significant that the average age in Big Park, Lake Montezuma, and Sedona, although higher than the county average, was decreasing during this period, while the average age in Clarkdale was increasing. This suggests that persons migrating into the former areas are, on average, younger than the typical resident in 1990, while Clarkdale is attracting persons whose average age exceeds that of those already residing there.
2 | 16
2004 Verde Valley Forum
number of retiree-aged populations. This phenomenon is confirmed in Tables B-1 and B-2 in Appendix B, and sheds an interesting perspective on the changing population distribution across the Verde Valley region. Appendix B contains detailed information regarding which population age groups are growing most rapidly within each community in the Verde Valley. Within the Verde Valley all communities experienced increases in the percentage of working age population. However, Big Park, Camp Verde, Cornville and the Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP come closest to mirroring what is going on in the county. In each of these communities as well as in the county, the percentage of persons under five years decreased along with the percentage of those aged 65 and over. At the same time, the percent of those aged 20-64 increased.
Figure 2-3. Change in Number of Residents Under 5 Years of Age, 1990-2000
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000. Population by Sex and Age.
Clarkdale and Jerome were similar to the county in that the percentage of the population under five years of age decreased while the working-age population percentages increased in these areas. However, the percentage of retirement-age persons increased rather than decreased in these two locations.
In Cottonwood, Lake Montezuma, and Sedona, the percentage of the population under five years of age increased while the working and retirement age groups each increased as a percent of total population. Therefore, there is no common denominator with respect to the age distribution changes among the various Verde Valley
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
...there is no common denominator with respect to the age distribution changes among the various Verde Valley communities.
2 | 17
Figure 2-4. Change in Number of Residents 5-19 Years of Age, 1990-2000
persons diminish over the ten years while the remaining five areas experienced increases in the relative importance of this age group. No common theme is evident here except that a larger number of families moving into the Clarkdale, Cornville, Cottonwood, and Jerome areas appear to have fewer children compared with those families moving into the remaining communities in the region. The above analysis has focused almost exclusively on the relative size of the various cohorts in the Verde Valley. However, the absolute size of these cohorts over time is also significant. Figures 2-3 to 2-6 provide data that show the absolute increase or decline in the number of persons in each age cohort over the 1990 2000 period. Figure 2-3, for example, shows these changes for persons under five years of age. The largest increase was in Cottonwood where this group increased by 227 persons over the 10 years. With the exception of Jerome, all communities in the region gained population in the under-5 age group. Figure 2-4 provides similar information for persons in the 5-19 age group. As
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000. Population by Sex and Age.
communities. Some communities are experiencing greater importance in the under-5 group while others are trending toward more retirement-age groups. At the same time, the percentage of the school-age population (5-19 years) has also diverged among the communities. Clarkdale, Cornville, Cottonwood, and Jerome saw the percent of school-age
2 | 18
2004 Verde Valley Forum
noted above, the percentage of school-age persons compared to all persons in Clarkdale, Cornville, Cottonwood, and Jerome diminished over the 10 years; however, from this figure we see that the absolute number of persons in this schoolage group has increased over this period. Cottonwood-Verde Village experienced a 798-person increase in school-age children while Camp Verde experienced a 719-person gain. Clarkdale's increase was 160 persons. Only Jerome experienced a decrease among this group, losing 22 persons. Figure 2-5 shows the absolute increase in population for the cohort that grew by the greatest amount over this period the age group comprising 20-64 year-old persons. Although this group increased in size in all communities except in Jerome, the increase was not evenly distributed across the region. The increases in Cottonwood-Verde Village and Sedona were 1,985 and 1,913 respectively. The increase in persons in 20-64 age cohort in Cottonwood (1,769) and Camp Verde (1,765) were also significant. However, as is apparent in Figure 5, increases in the other four communities, although positive, were considerably smaller, and Jerome experienced a loss of 30 persons in this age group.
Figure 2-5. Change in Number of Residents 20-64 Years of Age, 1990-2000
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000. Population by Sex and Age.
Figure 2-6 provides the change in population for those persons age 65 years and older. Over the 1990-2000 period, Cottonwood's population increased by 704 persons for this group. Cottonwood-Verde Village was close behind with 601 more persons age 65 and older. Big Park and Camp Verde also experienced increases approaching 600 persons in this age group.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
2 | 19
Figure 2-6. Change in Number of Residents 65 Years and Older, 1990-2000
income data for the Verde Valley communities in 1999. The percentage of persons whose incomes are below the poverty level is also shown. (Latest census data report income levels from 1999, since the information was gathered prior to the end of 2000.) These figures reflect the considerable variation among the region's communities with respect to the income distribution within the local area. Median household income in Sedona is highest in the region. Residents in the Coconino portion received $46,512 in 1999. This amount was over $3,000 above income levels in the Yavapai portion of Sedona ($43,258). These numbers compare with a county-wide household income average of $34,901, and a statewide average of $40,558. Big Park households received the second highest income ($38,477) while Cornville residents received incomes considerably above the county average ($36,992). Household incomes in the CottonwoodVerde Village CDP and in Clarkdale were marginally above the Yavapai average ($35,075 and $34,911, respectively). Incomes in the remaining communities were substantially below the county average.
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000. Population by Sex and Age.
However, Sedona's increase was only 171, which exceeded only Cornville (142) and Lake Montezuma (97), as well as Jerome where the number of persons in this cohort declined by nine.
Income and Poverty Status
Table 2-4 provides a snapshot of median household income as well as per capita
2 | 20
2004 Verde Valley Forum
Camp Verde incomes averaged $31,868 while the average income in Jerome was $27,857; Cottonwood household income was $27,444 and in Lake Montezuma the figure was $33,750. Quite a different picture emerges when we look at per capita incomes in these communities. Sedona's Coconino population still recorded the highest per capita income, earning an average of $34,246. The per capita incomes of Big Park residents ($30,026) were essentially the same as those in Sedona Yavapai portion ($30,162). These numbers are substantially higher than the county average ($19,727) and statewide ($20,275).
Table 2-4. Income and Poverty Status, 1999 Median Household Income 1999 ($) Per Capita Income 1999 ($) Percent of Population Below Poverty Level 1999
Geographic Area Arizona Yavapai County Mingus Mountain CCD Verde CCD Big Park CDP Camp Verde town Clarkdale town Cornville CDP Cottonwood city Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP Jerome town Lake Montezuma CDP Sedona city (part) Sedona city (Coconino)
40,558 34,901 32,337 36,202 38,477 31,868 34,911 36,992 27,444 35,075 27,857 33,750 43,258 46,512
20,275 19,727 17,712 21,647 30,026 15,072 18,441 16,500 17,518 16,734 19,967 17,043 30,162 34,246
13.9 11.9 10.7 12.3 8.4 14.0 10.3 15.9 13.5 8.7 15.1 9.1 10.2 8.5
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 3, Matrices P53, P77, P82, P87, P90, PCT47, PCT52. Note: Personal Income includes wages, salaries, other labor income, proprietor's income, rental income, transfer payments, less personal contributions to social insurance. For poverty definitions and methodology, see the Census Bureau's "Current Population Reports," Series P-60.
Per capita incomes in Jerome were third highest ($19,967) and Clarkdale's figure was $18,441. The numbers are lowest in Camp Verde where per capita income averaged $15,072 in 2000. Why is there a difference in rankings among communities when we look at per capita income as opposed to household incomes? The most likely conclusion is
that individuals in one-person households earn higher average incomes than at least one and perhaps both members of twoperson households. This suggests that single person households in the Verde Valley communities are among the highest income earning households.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
2 | 21
Census data also capture the percentage of population below the government-defined poverty level. Statewide, 13.9 percent of all individuals were listed as having incomes below the poverty level in 1999. In Yavapai County, this percentage falls to 11.9 percent, and the majority of communities in the Verde Valley contained even smaller percentages below the poverty level. The community with the lowest incidence of poverty was Big Park (8.4 percent of residents). Figures for Sedona (Coconino) and Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP were also below nine percent. The highest rates in the region were in Cornville (15.9), Jerome (15.1), and Camp Verde (14.0).
average although the figure for Cottonwood was 16.8 percent which was the highest in the region. Education attainment for persons age 25 and over is also available from the Census data. Table 2-5 provides education measures that show the percentage of the population in each community that had less than a ninthgrade education in 2000, the percentage who completed high school or higher education, and the percentage who had completed a bachelor's degree or higher. Residents within the Verde Valley communities were more likely to have completed high school than their statewide counterparts, but less likely to have completed a bachelor's degree or higher levels of education. The percentage of persons with less than a ninth-grade education statewide was 7.8 percent in 2000. This figure was only 4.6 percent in Yavapai County. In Jerome, all residents age 25 and above reported at least having completed nine years of education. The percentage of persons age 25 and above in Arizona who had completed high school by 2000 was 81.0. In Yavapai, the figure increases to 84.7. In the Verde Valley, these numbers ranged from a high of 96.6 percent in the Sedona-Coconino area and
Language and Educational Attainment
The percentage of the population age five and older who speak a language other than English at home is quite low across all areas of the Verde Valley when compared to the overall statewide average. In Arizona, over 25 percent of the residents fall into this category. The number in Yavapai County; however, is only 9.7 percent. This percentage drops to 7.7 percent in Cornville and 6.3 percent in Sedona-Coconino. (See Table 2-5.) The percentages in most of the Verde Valley communities slightly exceeded the county
2 | 22
2004 Verde Valley Forum
93.4 percent in Jerome, to a low of 77.0 percent in Cottonwood and 78.1 percent in Camp Verde. The overall percentage of high school graduates in the Verde Valley was approximately 83 percent, which is just below the 84.7 percent for the county.
Table 2-5. Language and Educational Attainment, 2000 Percent of Population Age 5 & Over Who Speak Other than English at Home Population 25 Years and Over in 2000 % High School % with < 9th Graduate or % with Bachelor's Grade Education Higher Degree or Higher
Geographic Area Arizona Yavapai County Mingus Mountain CCD Verde CCD Big Park CDP Camp Verde town Clarkdale town Cornville CDP Cottonwood city Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP Jerome town Lake Montezuma CDP
25.9 9.7 12.7 11.5 10.0 9.8 11.7 7.7 16.8 11.2 14.4 11.2
7.8 4.6 5.8 5.2 2.6 8.2 4.0 5.0 9.2 4.2 0.0 6.4
81.0 84.7 82.4 83.5 91.1 78.1 83.9 78.9 77.0 84.7 93.4 79.4
23.5 21.1 16.7 25.9 40.8 11.8 19.8 15.2 13.9 16.6 31.7 20.7 37.5 43.2
However, the percentages diverge signifiSedona city (part) 14.5 2.6 88.4 cantly when we Sedona city (Coconino) 6.3 0.3 96.6 turn to higher education. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 3, Matrices P19, P36, P37, P38, PCT24, PCT25. Statewide, 23.5 percent of lower in most of the remaining local comArizona residents 25 years and older had munities including Camp Verde (11.8%), completed a bachelor's degree or higher Cottonwood (13.9%), and Cornville (15.2%). level of education by 2000. County-wide, the percentage was 21.1. The only communities In the Verde Valley, a strong correlation in the Verde Valley that exceeded the is apparent between age, income, and county average were Sedona Coconino education. Communities with the higher (43.2%), Sedona Yavapai (37.5%), Big Park median age population, tended to be the (40.8%), and Jerome (31.7%). This level of ones with the higher per capita incomes and educational attainment was considerably higher education as well.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
2 | 23
Profile of the Yavapai-Apache Nation
Census information is also collected and published for persons residing on the tribal reservations across the U.S. However, in many instances, the published format does not follow the same pattern as exists for cities and counties. In addition, some of the tribal regions contain so few persons that disclosure prevents the publication and dissemination of some of the information. However, the data related to the YavapaiApache Reservation in Table 2-6 were assembled and published by Elliott Pollack and Pat Schroeder for use in the Arizona Statewide Economic Study 2002. This information in the table contains similar
Table 2-6. Yavapai-Apache Demographic and Economic Profile, 2000 Population Percent of AZ total tribal population Percent of population under age 20 Percent of population age 20-54 Percent of population over age 54 Median age, years Employment (number) Unemployment rate Median household income Percent of state median household income Percent of population below poverty level
content to that presented earlier for other communities in the region. Compared with many tribal areas in the state, Yavapai-Apache is very small. The resident population in 2000 was 743 persons or 0.4 percent of Arizona's total tribal population. Over 45 percent of the tribal residents were under age 20 in 2000 and an additional 42.1 percent were between ages 20 and 54 years. The median age was 23.5 years, which makes it the youngest community in the Verde Valley region. The percentage of tribal residents with a high school diploma in 2000 was 54.5 percent; the age of those with a college degree was 13.1 percent. Median household income on the reservation was $24,583, which is about 61 percent of the statewide median and 70 percent of the Yavapai County average income. The percentage of the population below the U.S. defined poverty level was 30.8 percent in 2000. This figure is in contrast to the 11.9 percent overall poverty rate in Yavapai County.
743 0.4 45.5 42.1 12.4 23.5 216 12.7 $24,583 60.6 30.8
Summary
The diversity as well as the similarity among communities is apparent as we analyze the information contained in the tables in this chapter. Each community is unique within the region with respect to age, income, and education; however, similarities also exist in that no community is dominant in terms of overall population size.
Sources: U.S. Bureau of the Census & Elliott D. Pollack & Co. and Pat Schroeder, Practical Solutions. Arizona Statewide Economic Study 2002
2 | 24
2004 Verde Valley Forum
3 THE PRESENT SETTING AND FUTURE IMPLICATIONS
The long-run challenge is to produce an economically, environmentally, and aesthetically viable region.
3 THE PRESENT SETTING AND FUTURE IMPLICATIONS
Projecting the future population of the Verde Valley is difficult. The region is small and experiences high levels of inand out-migration to and from the area. Migration trends are typically influenced by factors such as the economic strength of the larger economy, local climate, past migration trends, changes in the attraction (or pull-factor) of a local area, and numerous additional economic and non-economic considerations. But even if accurate projections are difficult to make, it's still helpful to see where the region may be headed, especially since sustainability of such trends is in question.
Any number of approaches can be used to project the future population for the region; however, if we simply increase the 1997 official projections by the 6.8 percent underestimation that existed by 2000, the entire Verde Valley region would be home to 74,621 persons by 2010. This represents an increase of 15,750 persons since 2000 (an increase of almost 27 percent in 10 years.) If we extend the projections out to 2020, the Verde Valley population (when adjusted for the 6.8 percent undercount) would reach 90,029. This results in an increase of 53 percent or over 31,000 more persons than lived here in 2000. These population projections for the individual communities within the Verde Valley are shown in Table 3-1 for both 2010 and 2020. The numbers for each community were generated using the same approach for the entire region, and reflect the official state projections made in 1997 adjusted for the 6.8 percent undercount that was evident by 2000. By 2020, the size as well as the individual character of many of the communities will change considerably. If these population projections hold true, Cottonwood will be the largest city in the
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
Projected Increases in Overall Population
Official population projections for Arizona have not been updated by the State Department of Economic Security since 1997. Furthermore, the 1997 projections were too conservative when evaluated against the actual population change that has occurred since the projections were made. In 2000, the official census figures for the Verde Valley were already 6.8 percent higher than the 1997 projections for the region for the year 2000.
If these population projections hold true, Cottonwood will be the largest city in the region and will be home to 16,283 persons. Sedona will have 15,605 persons, and Camp Verde would closely follow with 15,025 residents.
3 | 27
Table 3-1. Population Projections for the Verde Valley, 2010 and 2020 Geographic Area Verde Valley Incorporated Places Camp Verde Clarkdale Cottonwood Jerome Sedona (overall) Yavapai-Apache Nation Census Designated Places Big Park, CDP Cornville, CDP Cottonwood-Verde Village, CDP Lake Montezuma, CDP Remainder of Verde Valley Population (in Mingus Mountain and Verde CCD's) Total Verde Valley Population 2000 Projected Population 2010 2020
9,451 3,422 9,179 329 10,192 743
12,183 4,199 11,480 733 13,222 904
15,025 5,111 16,283 824 15,605 1,031
and long-run time frames. The short-run challenge, which primarily takes into account year-to-year changes, focuses on identifying sufficient numbers of jobs to meet the needs of an ever-increasing and changing labor force, as well as keeping up with construction demands, not only for new homes, but also for new schools, roads, medical facilities, and maintaining sufficient sewer and water capacity for the expanding number of the businesses and households located within the region. The long-run challenge is to produce an economically, environmentally, and aesthetically viable region that not only meets the ongoing short-run challenges, but also successfully addresses the changes in the region's character and in its economic, cultural, and social characteristics that are sure to occur within the rapidly growing region. While measurement and assessment of groundwater resources and uses is not the topic of this Report, it is clear that if rapid population growth continues, increasing attention must be devoted to groundwater issues in the near future. Many of these challenges have already been identified by various leaders and residents living within the Verde Valley. Achieving sustainable economic development will depend upon how these challenges are met. Examples of the challenges include:
5,245 3,335 10,610 3,344 3,267 59,117
6,747 4,429 10,905* 3,285 6,252 74,339
8,551 5,557 10,905* 3,962 6,838 89,692
*Cottonwood-Verde Village was projected to be 100% built out by 2005. Source: Arizona Department of Economic Security Research Administration Population Statistics Unit (Increased by 6.8% as explained in the text above.)
region and will be home to 16,283 persons. Sedona will have 15,605 persons, and Camp Verde would closely follow with 15,025 residents.
The Challenges of Rapid Population Growth
Changes in population size of this magnitude pose challenges for both short
3 | 28
2004 Verde Valley Forum
confronting urban sprawl developing transportation corridors implementing a regional approach to the planning process proposing changes in land use and exchange meeting the social and cultural appetites of new and changing populations over time. Some of these challenges have been the subject of previous Verde Valley Forums regional planning and growth management in 1999 and implementing a regional open space plan in 2002. The Verde Valley Land Preservation Institute was formed after the 2002 Forum in order to acquire, manage, and enhance the natural open space in the Region. This organization is an example of how the local area is attempting to attain sustainable economic development by meeting today's needs while preserving portions of the natural environment to meet the needs of future residents as well.
numbers of aging baby-boomers, and how these changes in the nation's demographics will impact the health care facilities, the housing sector, and the local workforce. Other studies that have addressed these issues include the recently completed 82nd Arizona Town Hall, which focused specifically on the needs of the elderly and health care options as the population ages. The average age within a region will increase over time due to the demographic aging of its existing residents or as a result of increased in-migration of elderly persons into the region. Not all areas are impacted to the same extent by elderly migration; however, Arizona and Nevada in the West, and Florida and North Carolina in the East, are among the leaders in attracting elderly migrants. For the most part, the majority of these migrants tend to be white, welleducated, and typically have higher-thanaverage incomes. Migrant streams in the future are likely to differ from the past as life expectancy differentials among racial groups decline. However, the education and income status of future migrants may be increasingly diverse as many future migrants may possess lower education and income levels when compared with past and present migrants. The elderly population in Arizona, and specifically in Yavapai County, is projected
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
The long-run challenge is to produce an economically, environmentally, and aesthetically viable region that not only meets the ongoing short-run challenges, but also successfully addresses the changes in the region's character and in its economic, cultural, and social characteristics that are sure to occur within the rapidly growing region.
Changes in the Older Population
The Verde Valley, along with Arizona and the nation, will also be dramatically affected by the general aging of the population. Considerable research at the national and state level has focused on the impacts of increased longevity and the increased
3 | 29
An aging population places new and increasing demands on local medical and health care facilities.
The importance of recreation and tourism along with health, education, and social services is apparent throughout the county and Verde Valley. The percentage of the population employed in these specific industries is either the highest or second highest amount in each of the communities in the region.
to dramatically increase during the first five decades of the twenty-first century. Numbers from the 2000 census showed Yavapai County had 36,816 persons age 65 and over. About 35 percent of these persons resided in the Verde Valley. The Arizona Department of Economic Security projects the number of persons age 65 and older in Yavapai County to increase to 53,041 by 2010 and to 75,884 in 2020. By 2050, this number could swell to 111,982. If the Verde Valley maintains its current share of the elderly population, by 2050, this area will be home to over 39,000 persons who are at least 65 years of age. An aging population places new and increasing demands on local medical and health care facilities. Variations in housing size and structure along with the types of recreation and entertainment demanded will also change. In addition, many of these individuals will continue to be employed, or will plan to be employed beyond age 65. These changes pose interesting challenges and opportunities for the Verde Valley communities. Many of these issues may be more easily addressed through a cooperative regional approach, and will require increased attention as the size of the elderly population continues to rise over the next 50 years.
The following sections in this chapter examine many of these topics, including the employment and housing conditions in the Verde Valley.
Employment by Industry in the Verde Valley
Tables C-1 and C-2 in Appendix C provide a profile of the Verde Valley region's industry by examining the number of persons employed in each category in 2000. The percentage of the local population employed in each industry is shown for the county and for each of the nine separate cities, towns and CDP's in the Verde Valley. Percentages for Yavapai County and the four CDP's appear in Table C-1. Table C-2 provides similar data for the five incorporated communities in the region. The importance of recreation and tourism and health, education and social services is apparent throughout the county and Verde Valley. The percentage of the population employed in these specific industries is either the highest or second highest amount in each of the communities in the region. The industries employing the greatest numbers of persons in each community are shown.
3 | 30
2004 Verde Valley Forum
Employment by Industry Location Yavapai County:
Largest Industries measured by employment in each Education, health and social services (19.9% of total county employment) Retail Trade (13.5% of total county employment) Big Park: Arts, recreation, food and lodging (18.5%) Professional, scientific, and administrative services (15.2%) Cornville: Construction (16.7%) Education, health and social services (16.2%) Cottonwood-Verde Village: Education, health and social services (21.9%) Retail Trade (15.8%) Lake Montezuma: Arts, recreation, food and lodging (27.1%) Education, health and social services (15.3%) Camp Verde: Arts, recreation, food and lodging (17.9%) Education, health and social services (15.8%) Clarkdale: Education, health and social services (20.2%) Construction (14.3%) Cottonwood: Education, health and social services (18.2%) Arts, recreation, food and lodging (16.9%) Jerome: Retail Trade (24.7%) Arts, recreation, food and lodging (21.6%) Sedona: Arts, recreation, food and lodging (19.6%) Education, health and social services (13.9%) Retail Trade (13.9%) It is also interesting to show where each industry is most important. This breakout is shown in the next box. For example, the percentage of persons employed in agriculture, forestry, and mining is higher in Cornville and Camp Verde than in any other locations in the Verde Valley. In each of these communities, 2.4 percent of the labor force is employed in these sectors. Construction employs a higher percentage of Cornville's workers compared to anywhere else, while manufacturing is highest in Cottonwood, etc. The relative importance of each industry in each community varies significantly as is apparent from the information shown here.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
...the percentage of persons employed in agriculture, forestry, and mining is higher in Cornville and Camp Verde than in any other locations in the Verde Valley.
3 | 31
Industry Agriculture, forestry & mining: Construction: Manufacturing: Wholesale trade: Retail trade: Transportation & utilities: Information: Finance, insurance, and real estate: Professional, scientific & administrative services:
Community with highest employment in each sector Cornville (2.4% of all employment in Cornville) Camp Verde (2.4% of all employment in Camp Verde) Cornville (16.7%) Clarkdale (14.3%) Cottonwood (9.3%) Cornville (8.4%) Cornville (4.4%) Cottonwood-Verde Village (4.0%) Jerome (24.7%) Cottonwood (16.0% Camp Verde (6.1%) Cottonwood (5.2%) Sedona (4.2%) Big Park (3.6%) Big Park (11.5%) Sedona (8.9%)
Big Park (15.2%) Sedona (11.1%) Education, health & social services: Cottonwood-Verde Village (21.9%) Clarkdale (20.2%) Arts, recreation, food & lodging: Lake Montezuma (27.1%) Jerome (21.6%) Other services: Sedona (8.0%) Cornville (7.3%) Public administration: Camp Verde (7.5%) Clarkdale (6.7%)
The Current State of Employment and Labor in the Verde Valley
One way to gauge the economic health of a region is to contrast employment conditions in the local area over time. Here, we focus on changes in employment over
3 | 32
2004 Verde Valley Forum
the past five years as well as the current unemployment rates for all communities in the Verde Valley region. Five years is long enough to examine the impacts of changes that might be associated with purely cyclical activity affecting these numbers.
Both the level of employment and the rate of unemployment are often used to measure the economic health of a community or region. Data in Table 3-2 are used to compare employment levels in 1998 with 2003 (through October) for all communities in the region. As we see in Table 3-2, employment in the region has increased significantly over these five years. On average, there was a 24.4 percent increase in local employment throughout the Verde Valley. The distribution of employment is also important when we consider the location of jobs within the region. The area in and around Cottonwood provided the highest levels of employment with 9,113 positions. Cottonwood-Verde Village had 5,039 workers in 2003, and the City of Cottonwood provided an additional 4,074 jobs. The employment level in Sedona was 6,063 jobs in 2003, and Camp Verde offered employment to 4,081 persons. Employment in each of the other locations was substantially lower than in Cottonwood, Sedona, and Camp Verde, yet still was significant overall. These numbers suggest that employment within the region is concentrated in three primary hubs along with additional jobs that are distributed throughout the region to meet the needs
of local residents and provide services to tourists in the region. Employment in all areas increased over this period. The largest increase occurred in Sedona where 1,131 new jobs were added over the five years. Cottonwood-Verde Village added 989 jobs and the City of Cottonwood added 799 new jobs between 1998 and 2003.
...employment within the region is concentrated in three primary hubs along with additional jobs that are distributed throughout the region to meet the needs of local residents and provide services to tourists in the region.
Table 3-2. Changes in the Level of Employment, 1998 2003 Number of Persons Employed 1998 2003* Change in Employment
Geographic Area Yavapai County Big Park, CDP Camp Verde Clarkdale Cornville, CDP Cottonwood Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP Jerome Lake Montezuma, CDP Sedona (Overall) Yavapai-Apache Reservation
65,891 1,901 3,280 1,291 1,467 3,275 4,050 345 986 4,932 227
81,976 2,365 4,081 1,606 1,826 4,074 5,039 428 1,226 6,063 272
16,085 464 801 315 359 799 989 83 240 1,131 45
*Employment levels for 2003 represent an average through October. Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, and Arizona Department of Economic Security. Note: Employment estimates were first calculated for the county and the subcounty numbers were estimated from county figures using a census share methodology employed at BLS.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
3 | 33
Table 3-3 provides a better indicator of the relationship Unemployment Rates (%) between the Geographic Area 2003* supply and Yavapai County 3.3 demand for workers in each Big Park, CDP 0.2 Camp Verde 2.9 community. Clarkdale 4.5 The low Cornville, CDP 3.6 unemployment rates in Sedona Cottonwood 4.3 (1.7%) and in Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP 3.4 Big Park (0.2%) Jerome 2.8 Lake Montezuma, CDP 3.4 suggest that Sedona (Yavapai) 1.7 number of persons seeking Yavapai-Apache Reservation 11.4 employment in these areas is just *Unemployment rates for 2003 represent an average through October. above the level Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, of demand for and Arizona Department of Economic Security. workers which is indicative of an extremely vibrant labor market. The unemployment rates in Jerome (2.8%) and Overall, however, the Camp Verde (2.9%) are also below the level employment market within overall rate for Yavapai County (3.3%).
Table 3-3. Unemployment Rates, 2003
Overall, however, the employment market within the Verde Valley has to be considered among the most favorable anywhere in the state and nation. Unemployment in Arizona averaged 5.8 percent over the first ten months of 2003. Nationally, unemployment in 2003 ranged from 5.7 percent in January to 6.4 percent in June. The only location in the Verde Valley that exceeded the state and national unemployment rates in 2003 was the Yavapai-Apache Reservation, where unemployment averaged 11.4 percent over this period.
Projected Number of New Jobs Required in the Region
Projections of the future Verde Valley population for the years 2010 and 2020 were presented earlier in the Chapter. What do these population projections imply for job creation? That is the subject for this section. In effect, we are asking whether job seekers will find employment in the Verde Valley or try to find jobs elsewhere. To get an estimate of the number of jobs that need to be created, we first look back at the 2000 census and obtain the ratio of persons employed to total population in each Verde Valley community and census designated place (CDP). The years 1999 and 2000 were good years nationally and in Arizona and they approximate years of full employment.
the Verde Valley has to be considered among the most favorable anywhere in the state and nation.
The rates in the remaining communities within the region are more in line with the county average and indicative of a more normal employment environment when compared with similar locations across the nation.
2004 Verde Valley Forum
3 | 34
We then take those employment to population ratios for each community and apply them to the projected populations shown in Table 3-1. The resulting figures show how many new jobs must be created by the years 2010 and 2020 to maintain the employment situation that existed back in 2000. That information is shown in Table 3-4. For example, in Camp Verde, 1,080 new jobs must be created between 2000 and 2010 so the same percentage of the population that was employed in 2000 is still employed in 2010. Camp Verde is projected to continue to increase in population and in 2020; a total of 2,203 jobs more than the level in 2000 must be created to keep the employment to population ratio steady. The total number of new jobs necessary across the Valley is 5,208 by 2010 and 11,350 by 2020 to keep this employment to population ratio the same as it was in the year 2000. Creating these new jobs and achieving a more diversified and sustainable economy represent a challenge to the residents of the Verde Valley.
market in the Verde Valley. Some of the more prominent issues focus on affordable housing and seasonal housing. The following sections rely upon census information to portray the existing situation in the Verde Valley on both these topics.
Table 3-4. Projected Numbers of New Jobs Necessary
in 2010 and 2020
Geographic Area Verde Valley Incorporated Places Camp Verde Clarkdale Cottonwood Jerome Sedona (overall) Census Designated Places Big Park, CDP Cornville, CDP Cottonwood-Verde Village, CDP Lake Montezuma, CDP
New Jobs Needed: In In 2010 2020
1,080 325 909 233 1,462
2,203 706 2,806 286 2,611
Affordable Housing
581 520 125 -26
1,279 1,055 125 278
Housing
Housing and changes in housing stock, along with availability and price, are all important elements in a growing and vibrant economy. These are but a few issues that arise when we analyze the housing
Total Jobs needed in all communities: 5,208 11,350 The Arizona Source: Calculations based on employment and labor force Housing Cominformation from Census 2000. mission and the Arizona Department of Housing in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development have recently completed an Arizona Affordable Housing Profile. This study offers a detailed examination of the housing stock for all of Arizona, and measures the affordability of housing for each incorporated community in the state.
Their study identifies the "affordability gap" that exists in each location. This gap is defined as "the difference between
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
3 | 35
Affordable housing thus becomes everyone's problem, not just the poorest households.
the number of households within each income range and the number of housing units affordable to those households." For households in this category to obtain housing in their community, they will either have to pay more than the normal 28 percent of their income for shelter, or they are forced to live in substandard or overcrowded housing conditions. The size of this household gap is measured for each community. Their most recent study was completed in 2002, and measures the gap for the year 2000 (Arizona Affordable Housing Profile: Findings and Conclusions 2002).
Statewide, the size of the gap was almost 195,000 households, or approximately 10.3 percent of all households; however, in Yavapai Table 3-5. Housing Affordability Gap, 2000 County, the gap was Gap as a 17.1 percent or 11,949 Percent Total Gap of Total households. This means Geographic Area (households) Households that affordable housing Sedona 2,301 46.7 presents a greater problem Camp Verde 818 22.6 for Yavapai County than it Clarkdale 254 17.7 does statewide.
Jerome Cottonwood Unincorporated Yavapai County
impacts other families higher on the income scale. This occurs when the poorer families are forced to pay more than the 28 percent threshold income level to secure housing, and in the process they occupy homes that would normally be available to persons with higher incomes. This shifts the problem up the income ladder and creates an imbalance between the supply and demand for homes for families at all income levels. Specifically, this occurs because the amount of affordable housing available to each income group will be partially used up or occupied by persons in the next lower level of income who have to spend more than they should to secure housing. This action "crowds out" the housing stock and forces people at each income level to look for more expensive housing. Affordable housing thus becomes everyone's problem, not just the poorest households. Using this approach, researchers who compiled the housing profile calculated the "affordability gap" for each of the five incorporated communities in the Verde Valley as well as an overall aggregate average for the unincorporated regions in Yavapai County. These results are presented in Table 3-5. The affordability gap is highest in Sedona where 46.7 percent of households fall within this category. A total of 2,301 households in
31 377
17.2 9.5 15.1
3,583
Source: Arizona Affordable Housing Profile: 2002. Arizona Housing Commission, Arizona Department of Housing, and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Furthermore, affordable housing is not just a concern for the poorest of households. The lack of affordable homes for the lowest income groups
3 | 36
2004 Verde Valley Forum
Sedona were listed as being unable to secure adequate housing without paying more than 28 percent of their 2000 incomes for shelter. Although Sedona's numbers are the highest for the Verde Valley, the affordability gap in each of the remaining communities, except for Cottonwood, exceeds the statewide average of 10.3 percent. In Camp Verde, this gap is 22.6 percent or 818 households. In Clarkdale, 17.7 percent or 254 households cannot find affordable homes. In Jerome, 17.2 percent or 31 households fall into this category. In the unincorporated regions of the entire county, the figures are 15.1 percent or 3,583 households. The numbers are lowest in Cottonwood, where 377 households and 9.5 percent of households could not secure adequate housing. A high affordability gap is not surprising for communities in a rapidly growing region since the increasing numbers of new residents into the area place ongoing pressures on the construction sector to build new homes. Given that new homes typically are priced higher than existing homes, overall average housing costs in an expanding region are higher than in other regions, and the affordability gap continues to worsen over time.
Seasonal Housing
Seasonal housing is a generic term used by many researchers to measure the number of "second homes" in a region. The Census Bureau uses the phrase "seasonal, recreational and occasional use" to describe the portion of homes in an area that fall into this category. In 2000, the Census Bureau classified 6,048 homes in Yavapai County as seasonal or second homes. This number was 7.4 percent of the total homes in the county.
Table 3-6. Seasonal Housing Units, 2000 Seasonal Housing Units Percent Seasonal Use
Geographic Area Yavapai County Big Park, CDP Camp Verde Clarkdale Cornville, CDP Cottonwood Cottonwood-Verde Village, CDP Jerome Lake Montezuma Sedona (all)
6,048 254 136 22 45 53 43 15 78 446
7.4% 8.1% 3.4% 1.4% 3.1% 1.2% 1.0% 7.7% 4.7% 7.8%
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Table DP-1: Profile of General Demographic Characteristics
The largest number of second homes in the Verde Valley was in Sedona where 446 homes and 7.8 percent of all homes were considered seasonal. Big Park had 254 seasonal homes representing 8.1 percent of all homes in that area. Fifteen homes or 7.7 percent of all houses in Jerome were also used for seasonal purposes. These numbers are shown in Table 3-6. The percentage of second homes in each of these three areas exceeded the
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
A high affordability gap is not surprising for communities in a rapidly growing region since the increasing numbers of new residents into the area place ongoing pressures on the construction sector to build new homes. Given that new homes typically are priced higher than existing homes, overall average housing costs in an expanding region are higher than in other regions, and the affordability gap continues to worsen over time.
3 | 37
overall county rate. The number and percentage of seasonal housing units in the remaining locations within the Verde Valley; however, were considerably below the county percentage. Cottonwood and Cottonwood-Verde Village had few second homes, averaging only slightly more than one percent of total residences in these communities. The variation in these numbers suggests that although almost 1,100 of region's homes are used for seasonal purposes, the distribution of these homes varies widely across the area. Many reasons could explain the differential; however, scenic views and higher land prices are often associated with more seasonal homes, while increased proximity to work and better access to schools might explain the presence of more year-round homes in any particular location.
new housing project or the positioning of a new road within the region. Planners and citizens alike will be able to use easyto-understand graphics that describe the long-term impacts of these events before a project is ever started. In fact, the County and Camp Verde have purchased the SGM software and have trained staff to utilize its forecasting potential. This will provide an invaluable resource to the region since land holdings and their changing uses over time represent an area of increasing interest and concern for Verde Valley residents. The 2002 Verde Valley Forum examined the feasibility of implementing a Verde Valley Open Space Plan. The General Plans for all the region's incorporated communities make extensive references to open space as view sheds, greenbelts, riparian areas, and a host of alternative means to protect and preserve land areas in their current uses. Some of the plans include formal definitions of open space, others do not; however, the importance of these uses is apparent throughout all areas within the Verde region. Private property makes up only about 17 percent of the Valley's land area. National Forest properties comprise 80 percent of the region's land base, and State Trust Lands occupy the remaining 3 percent.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
Land Use and Exchange
Verde Valley residents may soon be able to draw upon a newly emerging tool to measure the impact of proposed projects on existing lands. This tool, called Spatial Growth Modeling (SGM) was developed at Prescott College, and utilizes NASA technology to provide digitized scenarios that portray the "event impacts" associated with various planned or unplanned activities such as the development of a
3 | 39
Many of the properties targeted for potential future development lie adjacent to existing private property and although numerous Verde Valley residents often express a desire to maintain the present boundaries of the National Forests, it is this proximity of private and public lands that also generates problems.
The fact that the vast majority of land in the Verde Valley is in the public domain raises concerns among local residents and presents challenges to local officials about future uses of these lands. Many of the properties targeted for potential future development lie adjacent to existing private property and although numerous Verde Valley residents often express a desire to maintain the present boundaries of the National Forests, it is this proximity of private and public lands that also generates problems. The 2002 Sedona Community Plan aptly points out that as people seek to live adjacent to National Forest properties, this also brings about new utility corridors, roads, and fences as well as increased parties, littering, and inappropriate and unintended uses of the land. The very process of private property development adjacent to the forest lands diminishes the value of the forest landholdings. This results from the mandate that the National Forest manage its lands for "wildland" character. Once people use these lands for their private recreation and open space, wildland character diminishes, and makes these national forest properties candidates for future land exchange. The Sedona Plan highlights the need for careful planning and the development of buffer zones and identifiable trail access points to
minimize the negative aspects associated with private development adjacent to the National Forests (Sedona Community Plan, December 10, 2002. Pages 9-12 and 9-13). In April 2003, Arizona Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl introduced legislation under the name of The Northern Arizona National Forest Land Exchange Act that proposes to incorporate approximately 35,000 acres of forest and range lands owned by Yavapai Ranch into the Prescott National Forest. In return, "lower-elevation grazing lands and other federal lands in the communities of Flagstaff, Williams, Clarkdale, Cottonwood, and Camp Verde would be exchanged to Yavapai Ranch. These communities and six different camps plan to purchase portions of these parcels from Yavapai Ranch." (Press Release, U.S. Senator John McCain. April 11, 2003). The Prescott National Forest would acquire a combination of forestland and grassland property adjacent to the Juniper Mesa Wilderness Area near Seligman. In exchange, Yavapai Ranch would receive approximately 15,000 acres of grazing lands and more than 5,800 acres elsewhere in Yavapai and Coconino counties, including land located within the Verde Valley. The land exchange would consolidate property holdings and alleviate many of the
3 | 40
2004 Verde Valley Forum
problems associated with the development of property adjacent to public lands; however, controversy has arisen over the proposed land trade particularly related to water usage and it future availability as well as the potential impact on the Verde River associated with additional homes and business activity in the region. Alternatively, the newly acquired private lands would be added to the tax base and will generate additional tax revenue for the region's communities. Portions of these land areas have also been considered for view shed protection, housing market diversification and an emergency center fire station in Camp Verde. In addition to the federal lands, the Verde Valley also contains just under 20 sections of State Trust Land. These lands are managed by the State Land Department and generate revenue for public schools, hospitals, charitable institutions, and eleven other public beneficiaries. Although legislation has made the acquisition of State Trust Lands possible through the Arizona Preserve Initiative (API), most of these lands are presently not for sale given current requirements. Although most of the State Trust Land in the Verde Valley is currently under grazing leases or permits, these properties are located along primary highway
corridors, and provide substantial open space to maintain a buffer between the rapidly developing communities within the region. Acquisition of these properties for development could jeopardize the existing open space in these areas. Thus, although much of the landholdings in the Verde Valley are presently State Trust and National Forest lands, the potential for future development and changes resulting from land sales or exchange is considerable. Change in uses of these properties over time provides another challenge for residents, businesses and governments in the Verde Valley to address the issue of sustainable economic development. It should be noted here that a statewide working group is developing an initiative scheduled to be put before the voters in 2004. That initiative would propose that certain State Trust lands be designated as available for purposes of open space.
Although most of the State Trust Land in the Verde Valley is currently under grazing leases or permits, these properties are located along primary highway corridors, and provide substantial open space to maintain a buffer between the rapidly developing communities within the region.
Possible Build-Out Issues
Questions of sustainability arise if the amount of residential, commercial, and industrial construction begins to absorb the limited amount of developable land. While a comprehensive build-out analysis is beyond the scope of this Report, some of the issues involved are identified. The concept itself is simple: a build-out analysis is a look at the future assuming
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
3 | 41
that all land is developed consistent with current regulations. The United States Environmental Protection Agency lays out the basics of a build-out analysis: First, identify land which cannot be developed. This would include land under public ownership, deed restrictions, utility easements, and natural factors such as wetlands, floodplains, or steep slopes. Second, identify undeveloped land which may be developed. This would include not only undeveloped land on the market (being offered for sale) but also other undeveloped land which, according to current regulations, could be developed. This might include lots which are developable but which are owned by an adjoining and kept vacant to protect a scenic view. Third, identify land which has already been developed. Finally, a more complicated analysis is sometimes included that analyzes the future of partially developed land that could be developed more intensively. For example, residential housing might be on land that is zoned commercial or a lot might be subdivided under current regulation. Thus, what is conceptually simple may be made more difficult in practice depending on the level of detail the analysts pursue. (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Green Communities, How to do a Build-out Analysis. http://www. epa.gov/greenkit/ build_out.html)
3 | 44
2004 Verde Valley Forum
The extent to which the Verde Valley is effectively built out may depend on one's personal perspective as well. A contractor who cannot obtain enough jobs to cover fixed costs and generate an income may consider the area built out even if the analysis shows that not all lots have been developed. A construction equipment and materials supplier may consider the area as essentially built out as sales to contractors begin to fall even though they are still positive. Retirees looking to relocate may consider the area built out if they cannot obtain a house or apartment close by shopping, health care and a senior center even though there are options available at a greater distance away from these amenities. The two maps included here (3-2 and 3-3) show the extent to which the Verde Valley is being developed. Comparing the extent of development in 1960 with 2003 clearly shows that significant construction, mostly residential, has occurred to serve a growing Valley population. Given the population projections presented in this chapter, it is clear that local General Plans must begin to address "build-out" issues through zoning actions, applicable fees, incentives, etc., and that a sustainable economic development strategy must be devised to create jobs in new fields if and as the construction industry becomes less of a driving force in the Valley.
Incorporated Communities in the Region
The Verde Valley is home to five incorporated communities. This section provides descriptive information about these communities that may be useful to Forum participants. The current land area (in square miles) for each community is approximately: Camp Verde: 46.0 Clarkdale: 10.1 Cottonwood: 15.75 Jerome: 0.7 Sedona: 18.6 Net Assessed Valuation (in 2002): Camp Verde: $ 44,741,511 Clarkdale: $ 21,713,733 Cottonwood: $ 68,077,053 Jerome: $ 4,290,601 Sedona: $208,488,721
Table 3-7. Sales Tax Revenues Sales Tax Revenues Fiscal Years July 1999 through June 2003 1998-99 Camp Verde Clarkdale Cottonwood Jerome Sedona 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03
$ 601,881 315,985 5,461,102 291,138 9,408,397
$ 799,323 330,753 5,805,404 331,135 9,924,610
$ 1,340,482 361,529 6,066,539 319,204 10,310,911
$1,367,995 399,591 6,603,951 338,646 10,651,563
$ 1,458,211 429,519 6,341,595 348,594 11,000,953
Source: Arizona Department of Revenue
Revenues in Sedona exceeded $11 million in fiscal (FY) 2003, and are higher than that collected in all of the remaining areas combined. Cottonwood's collections were $6.3 million and Camp Verde collected almost $1.5 million in FY 2003. With a few exceptions, the sales tax collected in each community has increased over time at a steady but significant rate.
Sales Tax Revenues
The growth in sales tax revenues in these communities over the past five years is shown in Table 3-7. The city sales tax rates vary from 2.0 percent in Camp Verde, 2.2 percent in Cottonwood, 2.25 percent in Clarkdale to 3.0 percent in Jerome and Sedona.
Summary
Current trends, projected into the future, create real issues for residents of the Verde Valley. How the current quality of life, especially dependent on the natural beauty of the area, can be maintained and enhanced in the face of demographic pressures is a challenge worthy of the Forum's attention and discussion.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
3 | 45
3 | 46
2004 Verde Valley Forum
4 OPINIONS AND ATTITUDES OF VERDE VALLEY RESIDENTS ON ACHIEVING A SUSTAINABLE, DIVERSIFIED ECONOMY
"We cannot separate a sustainable economy from preservation of our quality of life. The reason a good many of us live up here has to do with fresh air and the availability of fishing and camping and hiking." --Focus Group Participant
4 OPINIONS AND ATTITUDES OF VERDE VALLEY RESIDENTS ON ACHIEVING A SUSTAINABLE, DIVERSIFIED ECONOMY This chapter summarizes the varied opinions and attitudes of five focus groups on the topic Achieving a Sustainable, Diversified Economy in the Verde Valley. The groups were organized around five themes: business, community and educational leaders, elected officials and civic leaders, environmental group leaders, and economic development professionals. Group participants were identified and invited by the Verde Valley Forum Research Committee. Four of the sessions were in Cottonwood at Yavapai College's Small Business Development Center, and one was in a conference room in a small business office in Sedona. A total of 31 persons participated in the five 90-minute sessions. For the purpose of discussion, the research team provided broad definitions of the terms sustainable development and diversified economy. The definition of the first term is from the State of Minnesota statutes and is "Development that maintains or enhances economic opportunity and community well-being while protecting and restoring the natural environment upon which people and economies depend." (See also Chapter 1 for a more complete definition.) The definition of a diversified economy is "one that does not depend on one or a few economic sectors to generate jobs and income; rather, a diversified economy is one in which the services, retail, manufacturing, construction and other sectors play a role." The form showing definitions and questions distributed to the focus groups is included in this Report as Appendix D. The goal of the research team was to listen to Verde Valley opinions and attitudes about sustainable economic development and capture the diversity of ideas for this background research Report. This chapter reflects the dynamic thinking of five groups of people, somewhat but not completely, representative of the region's population. This narrative gives voice to those ideas by including quotes paraphrased from the discussions. Participants' statements are shown in quotations or indented paragraphs.
The goal of the research team was to listen to Verde Valley opinions and attitudes about sustainable economic development and capture the diversity of ideas for this background research Report.
Overview
A sustainable, diversified economy supports a high quality of life in the Verde Valley by not damaging or detracting from the region's natural beauty. It should also support a higher quality of life in the Verde
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
4 | 49
Valley by creating and sustaining more jobs offering livable wages and career opportunities than now exist.
To each of these groups quality of life has different meanings in planning for economic development.
It would seem to me that we cannot separate a sustainable economy from preservation of our quality of life. The reason a good many of us live up here has to do with fresh air and the availability of fishing and camping and hiking. High quality of life is a widely shared value among focus group participants. It embraces both the rich natural environment and human standards of living. Once past this broad definition, however, differences emerge in how to measure high quality of life, how to balance the environment and the economy, how to pursue jobs, and in other areas. Economic development is conducted to benefit people, and because of people it is a complex, challenging venture. A question emerging from the transcripts of the five focus group meetings is "Who is economic development for in the Verde Valley? Is it the retiree population, who bring resources of time, energy, and talent while requiring housing and the amenities of culture, recreation, and health care? Is it the working professional raising a family and needing career opportunities, affordable housing, and quality schools? Is it the manual skills
worker, perhaps a migrant, needing higher wages, more secure employment, affordable housing, and educational opportunities?" To each of these groups quality of life has different meanings in planning for economic development. "Differences in ideas how we should grow" is a complex challenge for elected officials, community planners, and citizens of the region. Are we creating jobs for needy people in the Verde Valley or creating jobs to bring in people from New York?
A Sustainable, Diversified Economy in the Verde Valley
Focus group participants were asked the question "What does a sustainable, diversified economy in the Verde Valley mean to you?" to begin to define and describe the issue. The following response illustrates how many people place economic development in the context of the Verde Valley's exceptional quality of life. What is it we really want as human beings in the Verde Valley? Why are we here? Is it because we want to get rich? If I wanted a better job I'd move to Phoenix. The reason I live here, the reason that most of us live here, is we
4 | 50
2004 Verde Valley Forum
like the space, the scenery, the quiet; we like to go fly fishing or whatever. The statement also expresses how a large number of Verde Valley residents have moved here for quality of life, not for jobs. This is true for much of the large retiree population. Diversification means the Verde Valley needs to grow its economic bases. The hospital and health care services sector that capitalizes on the region's retiree population is one road to diversification. Diversity means to me a number of different kinds of business manufacturing and retail and construction. Our hospital is a good base for our economy.
In Sedona 98 percent of what comes in is leisure and leisure travelers are so up and down and so diverse they don't spend as much as if you have some kind of conference facility where you can host larger business groups. That's where the money in tourism is. You need to recognize that tourism is what's feeding the economy. We've got a real Mecca here in terms of tourism. Probably within a twentymile radius you'll not find as many things for a tourist to see and do as anywhere in the country. One of those things is bird watching. Ecotourism is one way to develop and diversify the tourism sector. The Verde Valley Birding Festival was mentioned as a successful attraction already in place. Several people said the region could be more actively marketed as an ecotourism destination.
One reason people want the economy to diversify beyond tourism is the proliferation of low wage service jobs in the industry. Another viewpoint is that tourism is in place now, the region will always attract visitors, and tourism can and should be further developed and diversified.
Tourism
Views about tourism's role in the Verde Valley are mixed. It is acknowledged that tourism is a dominant sector in the region, but people do not agree on whether that is good for the economy. One reason people want the economy to diversify beyond tourism is the proliferation of low wage service jobs in the industry. Another viewpoint is that tourism is in place now, the region will always attract visitors, and tourism can and should be further developed and diversified.
Strengths in Achieving a Sustainable, Diversified Economy
The Verde Valley's strengths for achieving a sustainable, diversified economy can be broadly categorized into two areas: human resources and the natural environment. Two organizations, Yavapai College and the Verde Valley Medical Center, are also recognized as assets to the economy.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
Image contributed by "Beach's On Location" Cottonwood, Arizona www.beachonlocation.com
4 | 51
Yavapai College is a strength because of its programs addressing workforce development and small business training, in particular the Northern Arizona Regional Skills Center and the Small Business Development Center. The medical center generates jobs while providing health care services to the community. Those services help attract people and new businesses to the region.
Despite positive feelings about the region's residents, the focus group discussants revealed a more complex reality in the Verde Valley's communities. For example, the contributions of the large retiree population were strongly applauded: "We have a high population of intelligent, energetic, and creative retired folk. We need to build on that." Besides contributing civic resources, retired people are also a major economic force in the Valley. That's a great group because they don't require jobs. They have assets and brain power and skills and they are a consumer for products that can be produced here but don't require jobs on the other end. You've got money that is available that doesn't require jobs. Not everyone agreed, however, that the economic and civic resource in the retiree population is a completely positive influence. One person said "the population that is making money somewhere else may be the biggest obstacle to economic development here in the Valley" because they are not dependent on the regional economy for their livelihood. Also, although the civic contributions of the retiree population are valuable, they stand in the way of younger people becoming involved and providing leadership.
Human Resources
The people of the Verde Valley are its greatest strength according to many focus group participants for a number of reasons: the contributions of the retiree population, the potential of the region's youth, the rich diversity of the population, an active citizenry, and the workforce.
The region's "committed citizenry" and "astounding talent on boards and commissions" are major strengths with the potential to bring about change and provide leadership.
It's people who are passionate about the quality of life, about the clean air, that come back here and want to give back. The region's "committed citizenry" and "astounding talent on boards and commissions" are major strengths with the potential to bring about change and provide leadership.
4 | 52
2004 Verde Valley Forum
Those [retired] resources are here and obviously it would be smart to utilize that but I think that the future and the sustainability is in the hands of the youth. And as long as we have old people interested, like us, the economy is not being run by young educated go-getters, and we are always going to be a retirement community and have a service industry for tourism. The Verde Valley retiree population is an enormous asset to the region, but economic dependence on this group is one way to limit economic diversification.
I hope that we appreciate the fact that we have this river in the desert and I think that we take it for granted. I would like to see our communities and businesses recognize it. But wow, what would we be without this river? Developing local agricultural production would help diversify the economy while promoting a sustainable industry. The region should consider creating an agricultural zone for open space designation and along the river corridor.
The Verde Valley retiree population is an enormous asset to the region, but economic dependence on this group is one way to limit economic diversification.
The Planning Opportunity
The opportunity for planning is an important strength for the Verde Valley. I think the greatest strength that the Verde Valley has is we are at such a crucial point to grow and we have this opportunity to be very innovative in our thinking in terms of what sort of community that we want to create. We have been involved with some rezoning issues and our landscape architects came up with the idea of a community center and having a safe place for pedestrians to walk and that is what people are really drawn to, locals and tourists alike. Meanwhile, others thought that Verde Valley communities have already taken
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
Natural Environment
The natural environment of the Verde Valley its beauty, recreational and cultural amenities, and climate are perceived as an economic strength because the environment attracts people to the area to live or to visit. Several people noted the environment's attractions could help recruit businesses to the region. Other features of the environment with economic attributes were the Verde River and high quality agricultural land. The Verde River is a defining feature for the Valley that has been underutilized in establishing a regional identity.
4 | 53
steps toward regional planning and that this is a very positive indicator for economic development. The Valley Academy for Career and Technical Education is an example of communities pooling resources to benefit the larger community. Open space and transportation planning on the regional level are other examples of regional cooperation. Focus group participants thought these cooperative initiatives establish a precedent for regional economic planning. We have all kinds of opportunity to be creative and innovative instead of going about it in a very traditional way and think about the number of jobs regardless of the downside of that industry or that job... We are looking at this regionally instead of just in single communities. We have finally matured to the point where we understand that when one community makes a choice it impacts all of us. Focus group participants were very positive about communities working together and saw the Verde Valley Forum as a good step for the region.
The People Factor
This narrative has already described how the people factor and human resource issues are complicated. Although the Verde Valley's people resource is considered by many to be the region's greatest asset, people also cause problems. One issue is because of attitude, another is diversity of the population, and the third issue relates to the workforce. Throughout the focus group discussions, many participants were pleased with the region's steps towards planning ahead. One of the obstacles to planning, however, is that in many communities there is a "provincial attitude," and "a mindset resistant to change." We still have a strong Wild West, we don't want any rules or laws in the small communities, and it's a real drag and a burden to come up with progressive zoning and other types of guidance that lead to communities that are well planned and attractive to people who will start businesses. Meanwhile, diversity of the population causes challenges to achieving consensus in communities and the region. The region's diverse population includes newcomers and old-timers affluent retirees, low-wage workers, descendents of miners from
Obstacles and Challenges Facing the Verde Valley
Obstacles and challenges to achieving a sustainable, diversified economy in the Verde Valley are categorized into three broad groups: people, infrastructure, and water.
4 | 54
2004 Verde Valley Forum
Jerome, and fourth and fifth generation ranching families a mix of backgrounds, dreams, resources, and experiences. ... the diversity of the population, and all the things that we were complimenting ourselves with that [diversity], are also truly obstacles... it's harder to get a shared vision. It's easier to get a vision with ranchers than with ranchers and farmers and then you bring in tourism... The region's dependence on the retiree population for civic contributions, economic resources, and political leadership is a challenge akin to the diversity issue. As discussed earlier, the retiree demographic is not representative of the region's population and broader economic needs. The Verde Valley must engage a wider spectrum of its population, especially its youth, in its leadership pool and generate new resources for economic development. The last component of the "people factor" is workforce issues. On one hand, low wage jobs in the tourism and service sectors create a vulnerable population of citizens who lack job security and decent housing. Many of these workers are undocumented workers. And so they take a number of jobs in the service industry, particularly
hotels, landscaping, and things like that that other people won't take. And they compose a major force of the major part of the workforce. One person felt that the region's abundance of low wage jobs is a major economic and social problem for the Verde Valley. He cites the impact of big-box chains as a negative for the workforce. One of the greatest obstacles is the coming in of these chains.... For example, Wal-Mart, which is a huge corporation in the U.S. They like to pay their workers seven dollars an hour or less. Consequently, it puts a group of people in a difficult position because they literally cannot afford to live in an apartment. They can't afford to have a car and take care of their kids. We then have a group of people that literally struggle all the time to survive. I don't think any one would want that kind of an environment in the Verde Valley. Another issue in the workforce is unpreparedness of the youth. One person works with a program to help youth understand they have broader career choices. We are especially focused on kids who are near graduation or who are seniors in high school. When we ask what are
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
The Verde Valley must engage a wider spectrum of its population, especially its youth, in its leadership pool and generate new resources for economic development.
4 | 55
you willing to do they say, well, work in the hotels, work at McDonald's, or work in restaurants. One person said "... half of our population is not prepared for jobs in certain industries" because a large percentage of our students don't finish high school. Mentorship programs for youth are a way to help youth prepare for careers. Unfortunately, the perceived weakness in the workforce is a challenge for business recruitment. Employers are concerned about coming here because they don't see a workforce. They don't see that there are enough quality people to draw from. Our quality people tend to be older retirees or younger retirees in their fifties and sixties. They're wonderful educated people but the young people who want to work are not terribly educated and have a lack of a work ethic. This is starting to be addressed through Valley Academy and Mingus.
range from kids unable to ride bikes safely in the neighborhood to workers needing to commute between Verde Valley communities. There is a scarcity of things to do like go to the movies or shop, so Verde Valley residents often travel to Flagstaff, Prescott, or Phoenix. Telecommunications infrastructure, like wireless internet, is not as strong as it could be. The lack of regional media means the region lacks a communication network. Although communities have their own newspapers, it is difficult to find out what's happening in another Verde Valley community without reading its own newspaper. Consequently, cultural activities in Cottonwood are hard to promote in Sedona and vice versa. Infrastructure issues are a challenge in recruiting new business to the area. All these issues also concern many current residents of the Verde Valley. Many would like to see better public transit, a regional newspaper, more planning for sewer systems in unincorporated areas. Several focus group participants said big-box stores like WalMart are important to the local economy by offering a place to shop for inexpensive consumer goods.
Infrastructure issues are a challenge in recruiting new business to the area.
Infrastructure
Infrastructure issues affect all areas of the Verde Valley. A lack of affordable housing is a problem in some communities more than in others. Transportation issues
2004 Verde Valley Forum
Water, Water, and Water
In the high desert of the Verde Valley, water is limited. People are concerned their
4 | 56
water is going to California, to Phoenix, or to Prescott. The availability of water is an overriding need in any kind of planning in the Verde Valley. The 300-pound gorilla in the room is water issues. We don't have good coordinated planning. We don't understand what water is available. "Not believing we have water issues" is one opinion. Not knowing how much water is available due to a lack of scientific data is another problem. We don't know what the sustainable population of the Valley is relative to the water that we can support for the next 100 years." The need for more scientific research to better understand the region's water availability was addressed in several focus groups.
Small Business Development
Small business development cuts across many of the issues discussed in the focus groups. As a strategy for Verde Valley economic development, it accomplishes several different goals. Small business can be sustainable, and an array of small businesses can help diversify the economy. Small business can capitalize on the region's tourism industry, and can help diversify the industry through ecotourism. Small business could also take the lead in developing the Valley's agricultural base. The Internet offers much untapped potential for business development in rural areas. Because of the internet, marketing possibilities for entrepreneurship reach a much broader market... As we know, small business drives a lot of the economy so I think it's a really important topic. It is very sustainable. There is widespread anecdotal knowledge about telecommuters in the Verde Valley. People knew of home-based occupations like technical writing, investing, and various types of consulting. The potential of these
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
The availability of water is an overriding need in any kind of planning in the Verde Valley. "The 300-pound gorilla in the room is water issues. We don't have good coordinated planning. We don't understand what water is available."
How to Make It Happen
Ideas about how to achieve a sustainable, diversified development in the Verde Valley are discussed in the following two areas: small business development and regional marketing. Ideas about the importance of building a regional identity and taking a regional approach are also discussed.
Small business can be sustainable, and an array of small businesses can help diversify the economy.
4 | 57
The uncertain quality of the Valley's telecommunications infrastructure is another constraint to developing the internet as a small business tool.
home-based "underground" businesses as factors in economic development is limited because not much is known about them so they are largely uncategorized in the region's business community. The uncertain quality of the Valley's telecommunications infrastructure is another constraint to developing the internet as a small business tool. For example, wireless internet is not available throughout the region. Yavapai College is viewed as a champion of small business. The Small Business Development Center (SBDC) is a strong ally of small business. The SBDC's partnership with the Yavapai-Apache Nation is a good example of building partnerships to promote business development in the Verde Valley.
I don't think that we have to go outside. I think that we need to look at the inside first. We see truck after truck after truck going to the landfill... what a marvelous opportunity we have over there to save the useable land and keep from polluting it so much and simply reusing. Besides reusing materials or building green recycling, one person said business opportunities are in place using locally available raw materials: Can we produce it here? Can we make it here? Can we use natural materials? I think of adobe houses that are built out of natural material dug out of the ground. There are fake adobelooking houses that have frames and installation and everything else... But the real test is to draw a line around the Valley and say okay, how much is consumed here. What are our needs for food, electricity, shelter, water, fuel, and so on? See how much we can produce here.
There was a question about how to encourage more entrepreneurial activity in the Verde Valley as an economic development strategy. One way is to continue to support the services provided by the SBDC and the college's Regional Skills Center.
There was a question about how to encourage more entrepreneurial activity in the Verde Valley as an economic development strategy. One way is to continue to support the services provided by the SBDC and the college's Regional Skills Center. Another approach is to offer more programs about starting a home-based business. Small business development as an approach to sustainable diversified economic development supports the view that the Verde Valley should develop from within rather than look outside to bring in new companies.
2004 Verde Valley Forum
Marketing the Region
Focus group participants also felt that the region needed to market itself and recruit businesses to the Verde Valley. One way to make this happen is to establish a regional marketing association. The association could target clean businesses or organizations.
4 | 58
I'm looking at a Verde Valley marketing association that goes out and seeks the relocation of Sierra Club or Sustainable Earth organizations. You go out and target certain disciplines, maybe through land availability... I think the Verde Valley community is going to have to bind together, Cottonwood, Camp Verde, Sedona and say here is some land that fits into our community plan and where you can put some small businesses and office buildings that house internet companies or something like that. The communities of the region should support the association cooperatively, and the business community should be involved as well. A specific suggestion was to re-create the Verde Valley Regional Economic Development group because "it's already there." A strong topic throughout the discussion of attracting businesses to the region was the question of amenities. What does the Verde Valley offer businesses seeking a location here? There are many concerns about the ability of the Valley to offer attractive amenities. As discussed earlier, workforce quality is an issue, particularly in attracting the high wage, clean industries the Verde Valley chooses to target. Low test scores in local schools is also a negative.
Various infrastructure issues, including housing, water, telecommunications, sewer, and transportation must be resolved. The community does not offer a lot of amenities for social and consumer activities that business leaders and their families could require. Finally, some Valley communities are not prepared to offer quality locations for business or housing. How does a government attract business? You can go out there all day long and make offers, but businesses come here and drive around and see old cars, unkempt fences, and garbage. They're not going to be attracted. I always say that the town should consider itself a person interviewing for a job. There are things that towns need to do to have a neat appearance, to have zoning and planning to protect land values. It is clear that as a region, and as respective communities, the Verde Valley must address the tangible and intangible amenities it offers to relocating businesses.
It is clear that as a region, and as respective communities, the Verde Valley must address the tangible and intangible amenities it offers to relocating businesses.
Regional Planning and Regional Identity
Throughout the focus groups, regional planning was mentioned again and again as a strategy for regional economic development. The Focused Future planning
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
4 | 59
programs in Sedona and Cottonwood were popular and effective in helping those communities. People also said the transition of the Sedona Academy to a Verde Valley perspective is an important step forward. There is concern that Verde Valley communities need to develop more community spirit and a regional identity. Local activities and events need to be promoted regionally. Promote Verde River Days and Fort Verde Days in Sedona. Promote Sedona events in Camp Verde. These types of shared activities will help foster community spirit throughout the Verde Valley and build connections among the different communities. A regional newspaper would also help regional communication and build regional identity. People also said communities must be able to plan for water development and use. We certainly need some kind of water policy here so that developers don't build without any regard to what the water resources are. We have no control over what goes on and anyone can get a permit and a well if they want to, including a developer. It would be nice if that could be changed in some way so that it could be controlled.
There is a strong feeling that local communities do not have enough knowledge about, or control of, local water issues. One person said the region needed a local governing body for water. A final thought on regional planning is to diversify the people doing the planning. For instance, community involvement in forums should be broadened. I would also say that maybe create forums for people other than old white guys to sit around and debate this. An old white guy's view is one view and it may not be the best or the one that is going to move us forward.
4 | 60
2004 Verde Valley Forum
5 VISIONING FOR THE FUTURE
It is primarily in the area of policies for community and economic development that the Verde Valley is challenged like much of rural America and rural Arizona.
5 | 19
5 VISIONING FOR THE FUTURE "Significant portions of rural America are in trouble. For some parts of rural America, the slow slide to no longer being viable economically, socially, or politically is within sight. At the same time, without intending it, we are headed back to a rural America of the rich and the poor of resorts and pockets of persistent poverty. Yet most current rural policies do not meet the needs of rural people and communities; they are designed for the past, not the future."
-- Karl N. Stauber, president, Northwest Area Foundation Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Vol. 86, No. 2, Second Quarter 2001
Over and over in the focus groups held to inform this Report, Verde Valley residents asserted that they did not want to "be like Phoenix" but wished for better employment opportunities and amenities.
Stauber's observations regarding rural America are distressing for two reasons: first, for their bleak assessment of the state of rural America today and second, for their negative view of the current, but outdated, rural policy mix. While some parts of rural Arizona are accurate examples of the depressing situation that Stauber describes, the Verde Valley does not fall neatly into his characterization of troubled rural America. As we've seen earlier in this Report, the Valley's population is growing, incomes are rising and the economy has real bright spots. Yet the Valley does have its rich and its poor, its resorts and its poverty. It is primarily in the area of policies for community and economic development that the Verde Valley is challenged like much of rural America and rural Arizona.
The Rural Setting
Public officials and private citizens alike in Arizona's rural communities desire to preserve or enhance their region's quality of life while cultivating a higher standard of living for rural residents. Over and over in the focus groups held to inform this Report, Verde Valley residents asserted that they did not want to "be like Phoenix" but wished for better employment opportunities and amenities. Even where rural population is growing, as in the Verde Valley, urban populations often outpace this growth and improvements in education, transportation, and telecommunication infrastructures do not reach the rural communities. And even where the rural populations grow, the best
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
As we've seen earlier in this Report, the Valley's population is growing, incomes are rising and the economy has real bright spots. Yet the Valley does have its rich and its poor, its resorts and its poverty. It is primarily in the area of policies for community and economic development that the Verde Valley is challenged like much of rural America and rural Arizona.
5 | 63
educated young people still migrate to the cities and rural wage rates are lower than in the urban setting for similar work.
An active and aggressive economic development program in this kind of setting is not necessarily a program for economic growth per se; rather, it often becomes a program to cushion the employment losses that would otherwise occur a program to help "stay even."
Too often, these units of government move from fiscal crisis to fiscal crisis without the capability of developing longer-term strategies or influencing policy significantly at the state level through a coordinated and sustained effort.
Providing public services to a substantial, rapidly growing rural population dispersed over a large geographic area is often a struggle especially where large capital investments are required as in the case of roads, water, and sewage services. There is a continuing challenge in creating hightechnology, high-paying jobs just to replace those lost through high productivity increase (agriculture), technological change (utilities), or regulatory revision (financial institutions). An active and aggressive economic development program in this kind of setting is not necessarily a program for economic growth per se; rather, it often becomes a program to cushion the employment losses that would otherwise occur a program to help "stay even." When these challenges are combined, they severely limit the fiscal abilities of local, county, and regional governmental entities to be creative, proactive, and vibrant in anticipating and meeting the demands of their citizens. Too often, these units of government move from fiscal crisis to fiscal crisis without the capability of developing longer-term strategies or influencing policy significantly at the state level through a
2004 Verde Valley Forum
coordinated and sustained effort. They are too often just trying to deal with problems or mandates thrust upon them from the outside. The Rocky Mountain Institute observes, "Whatever the cause of the influx, rapid expansion more than about a 2 percent annual increase in population generally brings more harm than good. Communities can't seem to keep ahead of problems created by expansion of this rate. Before one problem can be defined and solved, another arises, then another. They pile up and complicate one another. Local leaders are overwhelmed." (Economic Renewal Guide, p. 4)
More Evidence
Since 1962, leading citizens from the state have convened to discuss and make recommendations on issues confronting Arizona through the Arizona Town Hall. Town Hall reports are instructive in that they often contain observations or recommendations that reflect the unique challenges the rural areas face in terms of the topic of that particular Town Hall. In May 1998, the Arizona Town Hall topic was Meeting the Challenges and Opportunities of Arizona's Growing Senior Population. The Report indicated, "Older rural people, by almost all economic, health, and social
5 | 64
indicators, are poorer and less healthy, have less adequate housing and fewer options in personal and public transportation, and have significantly greater problems with access to health professionals and community-based programs and services." In May 1999, the topic was Uniting a Diverse Arizona. Among the observations in that Report were, "...many outlying areas...cannot access the Internet. In turn, schools lack the resources to offer newer technologies to rural students..." Also, "There has been a movement from rural jobs to urban jobs caused by the fact that families are less able to sustain their livelihoods from natural-resource industries, farming, ranching, timber and mining...At the same time, there is a counter-movement of affluent urban dwellers acquiring homes in rural areas. Such a movement puts a strain on the existing infrastructure of the affected communities and affects local economic and social structures." In May 2001, the topic was Moving All of Arizona into the 21st Century Economy. The Town Hall Report observed, "The ability of rural Arizona to grow is influenced by limitations inherent in existing transportation and communications infrastructure systems. Inadequate roadways make it difficult to get
products and people in and out of rural communities...The lack of broadband telecommunication access also is a serious impediment to rural Arizona's economic growth. Rural communities have difficulty funding infrastructure improvements as a result of the shift in funding mechanisms from federal and state grants to loan programs. Rural areas also lack funds necessary to compete with urban areas in providing incentives to attract businesses. In addition to basic financial limitations, political limitations also frequently prevent raising local taxes to fund such improvements." In October 2001, the topic was Pieces of Power: Governance in Arizona. The Report observes, "The role of county government must be enhanced and modernized to enable them to provide regional solutions, particularly between municipalities. Alternatively, existing regional structures... should be reviewed to determine whether they have a functional role in regional problem solving."
It Could Be Worse Much Worse
With its population down to the 2,000 level that is often considered the threshold for a functioning regional center, Superior [Nebraska], the anchor of Nuckolls County, has vowed it will not catch the death chill of nearby Hardy. But the town's struggle to stay alive shows how even with the best of civic intentions, it is difficult to fight forces that have humbled much of rural America. People here taxed themselves to create an economic development fund. They put in a fiber-optic network for telecommunications...They zoned 30 acres at the edge of town for industrial use, graded it and put in utilities. At the center of the proposed industrial park sits the empty shell of a brand new building...Just outside of town is a paved and well-lighted runway, although only a lone crop duster, flipped in a storm, rests upsidedown on the tarmac... They put together a PowerPoint presentation, boasting of a union-free labor force in a town where a solid three-bedroom, two-bath home sells for less than $50,000... And so they wait for jobs, for business, for a future.
THE NEW YORK TIMES, December 1, 2003, p. A18.
Assumptions and Values
Many of these kinds of challenges were discussed in the focus groups informing this Report. As noted in Chapter 4, we found that there are remarkable shared values across the communities of the Verde Valley
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
5 | 65
HERE THEY COME! ...Americans are once again on the move, this time in a migration that pushes growth even farther into the countryside. Increasing numbers of people are fleeing the suburbs and choosing to live in the small towns and open spaces surrounding America's magnificent national and state parks, wildlife refuges, forests, historic sites, wilderness areas, and other public lands. Gateway communities the towns and cities that border these public lands are the destinations of choice for much of the country's migrating populace...gateway communities offer what an increasing number of Americans value: a clean environment, safe streets, and a friendly small-town atmosphere. But just as in the suburbs, unplanned growth and rapid development in gateway communities can create the same social ills from which many Americans are now fleeing.
-- Jim Howe, Ed McMahon, and Luther Propst, Balancing Nature and Commerce in Gateway Communities, Island Press, 1997, pp. 1, 3. 5 | 66
and across groups with particular interests, such as education, business, and community development. In the focus groups, common themes appeared throughout. Participants in all five groups agreed that the clearest strength of the region is its people. The most widely held value in addressing the challenge of sustainable development is the Verde Valley's quality of life. Similarly, there are commonly held assumptions. Most important is that the region will continue to grow in population and that water will be an increasingly important issue in the future. It is really not surprising that there is this commonality of assumptions and values across the Verde Valley. For the most part, individuals have made the voluntary choice to live here. Another observation of participants in the focus groups was that if they were looking to maximize their own income and personal wealth, they simply wouldn't be here; they would be in Phoenix or some other metropolitan area. If there are these common assumptions and values in the Valley, then why do we need to go any further in this inquiry? That is, if we all essentially agree on our assessment of the state of the Ve

Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.

Copyright to this resource is held by the creating agency and is provided here for educational purposes only. It may not be downloaded, reproduced or distributed in any format without written permission of the creating agency. Any attempt to circumvent the access controls placed on this file is a violation of United States and international copyright laws, and is subject to criminal prosecution.

Arizona State Library, Archives and Public Records--Law and Research Library.

Full Text

The Verde Valley Forum is produced by The Sedona Academy of Public Affairs Officers: Frank Besnette, President Kent Jones, Vice President, Operations Marshall Whitmire, Vice President, Forums Linda Besnette, Secretary George Tice, Treasurer Jim Eaton, Immediate Past President Executive Committee: The above officers, plus committee chairs: Finance Chair, Gene Holloway Research, Dan Schay Public Information Chair, Jim Eaton Physical Arrangements Chair, Margo Running Participant Selection Chair, Kent Jones Ex-officio members: Judy Adams, Dick Dahl, Steve Hansen, Sandy Moriarty, Bill Pumphrey, Tom Shuman Board of Directors: Rod Abbott, Bob Aberg, Judy Adams, Rainy Atkins, Bea Axline, Ashley Baugh, Frank Besnette, Linda Besnette, Dick Dahl, Kathy Davis, John DiBattista, Paul Domingue, Jim Eaton, Fred Estrella, Judy Feldstein, Jodie Filardo, Louis Getoff, Ben Goldsmith, Cole Greenberg, Steve Hansen, Brenda Hauser, Lisa Hirsch, Gene Holloway, Diane Joens, Kent Jones, Paul Kessel, Bill Kusner, Gayle Mabery, Anita MacFarlane, Joan McClelland, Donna Michaels, Ben Miller, Jane Moore, Sandy Moriarty, Bill Pumphrey, Margo Running, Gozde Sevim, Dan Schay, Harry Schoenberg, Morrey Shifman, Kathy Shriver, Tom Shuman, Jean-Marie Swalm, Alex Thorne, George Tice, Chris Watkins, Marshall Whitmire Research Committee: Dan Schay (chair), Judy Adams, Frank Besnette, Kent Jones, Bill Pumphrey, Marshall Whitmire
Cover Images (panorama and woman birding) contributed by "Beach's On Location" Cottonwood, Arizona www.beachonlocation.com
ACHIEVING A SUSTAINABLE AND DIVERSIFIED ECONOMY IN THE VERDE VALLEY
2004 VERDE VALLEY FORUM
Lodge at Cliff Castle Camp Verde, Arizona February 27-29, 2004
Background Research Report Prepared by
NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY College of Business Administration Bureau of Business & Economic Research Rural Policy Program
A unit of the Bank One Center for Business Outreach Wayne R. Fox Director Joseph J. Walka Editor Authors Ronald J. Gunderson Linda Stratton Joseph J. Walka
SEDONA ACADEMY FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS
January 2004
2004 by Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona. All Rights Reserved.
This report is printed on 10% total recycled fiber, all post-consumer fiber.
ACHIEVING A SUSTAINABLE AND DIVERSIFIED ECONOMY IN THE VERDE VALLEY
"The assumption that economic prosperity requires growth seems so reasonable that most of us don't think much about it...the word `growth` has two fundamentally different meanings: `expansion` and `development.' Expansion means getting bigger; development means getting better, which may or may not involve expansion."
--Michael J. Kinsley Economic Renewal Guide, Rocky Mountain Institute, 1997, p. 1
Sponsorships of the 2004 Verde Valley Forum
Research Report Sponsor Northern Arizona University John D. Haeger, President
Forum Sponsor The City of Cottonwood and The Cottonwood Foundation for Economic Development
Representing Arizona Public Service Coconino County Sedona Red Rock News The Camp Verde Journal Cottonwood Journal Extra
Supervisor Matt Ryan
at Northern Arizona University
Yavapai-Apache Nation Town of Jerome
Jerome Historical Society Jerome Chamber of Commerce Jerome State Park Town of Clarkdale Town of Camp Verde Wells Fargo Bank
A MESSAGE FROM PRESIDENT JOHN D. HAEGER NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY
1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
3
LIST OF MAPS, TABLES, AND FIGURES
4
1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
5
2 GROWTH AND CHANGE IN THE VERDE VALLEY: A DEMOGRAPHIC PORTRAIT OF THE REGION
9
3 THE PRESENT SETTING AND FUTURE IMPLICATIONS
25
4 OPINIONS AND ATTITUDES OF VERDE VALLEY RESIDENTS ON ACHIEVING A SUSTAINABLE, DIVERSIFIED ECONOMY
47
5 VISIONING FOR THE FUTURE
61
6 PLANNING IN THE VALLEY
75
7 SOME ORGANIZATIONAL APPROACHES
99
APPENDIXES
A. Changes in Minority Population in the Verde Valley B. Changes in Age Composition, 1990-2000 C. Employment by Industry in the Verde Valley D. Focus Group Overview E. The Visioning Process F. Resolution to Establish Common Bonds and Principles For Regional Cooperation G. Information on Some Local Economic Development Efforts in Arizona
111 111 113 115 117 119 122 125
SOURCES ABOUT THE AUTHORS
126 128
Office of the President
January 7, 2004 To the Participants in the 2004 Verde Valley Forum: It is a privilege for Northern Arizona University to once again be involved in the Verde Valley Forum, as a financial contributor and through the development of the background research report which you will use in your own deliberations. This year's Forum is the 19th Sedona or Verde Valley Forum held since 1985 and I am proud to note that NAU faculty have participated in all but four of them. This is an important partnership for NAU and I hope that our productive relationship can continue into the future. The town hall or forum process has a long and illustrious history in our country. It is based on community involvement, informed and thoughtful discussion, consensus building, and careful policy analysis and formulation. These processes are essential as we confront new challenges in a new century. And one of our most important challenges is the creation of sustainable and diversified economies within our state, no easy task in a time of rapid and occasionally dramatic change. The work on the background report by my NAU colleagues implements my personal commitment to community outreach and the strengthening of ties between NAU and local communities throughout the state. Stronger ties with the people and the communities of the Verde Valley are a high priority for me you are our closest neighbors and we value your progress. With warm wishes for success,
John D. Haeger President
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
|1
|2
2004 Verde Valley Forum
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Northern Arizona University research team expresses its thanks to the many individuals and organizations that assisted us in developing this Report for the Verde Valley Forum. Numerous people in the Verde Valley region responded cheerfully to our inquiries and provided us with information and data as well as their own insights on the topics for discussion. The research committee of the Sedona Academy, listed in this Report, was most helpful in providing guidance to the team throughout the research effort and other members of the Sedona Academy assisted us in identifying and contacting Focus Group participants. Dan Schay, chair of the research committee, was especially helpful to the team throughout our work. Pat Schweiss of Larson Newspapers and Larson Newspapers provided many of the images used. A. Roy Horn of the Yavapai College Small Business Development Center graciously hosted four of the Focus Groups. Terri Nelson of Yavapai County and Aaron Seifert of the City of Sedona provided the maps of the Verde Valley. Chip Davis, County supervisor, was helpful in providing insights to the region. At NAU, a number of staff were critical to the successful completion of a project of this size. Wayne R. Fox made sure that the needs of the team were addressed quickly and completely. Theresa Stacy-Ryan, the College's publications specialist is responsible for the design and attractiveness of the Report. Sheila Nunnink and the student workers in the Bank One Center worked long and hard on transcribing the Focus Group transcripts in an accurate and timely way. Stewart Hall, our graduate assistant, gathered much of the data and provided professional advice to the team.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
|3
LIST OF MAPS, TABLES, AND FIGURES
2|10 2|12 2|13 2|14 2|15 2|16 2|17 2|18 2|19 2|20 2|21 2|23 2|24 3|28 3|33 3|34 3|35 3|36 3|37 3|38 3|42 3|43 3|45 A|111 A|112 A|113 A|114 A|115 Map 2-1. Verde Valley Area Map Table 2-1. Arizona and Yavapai County Populations Table 2-2. Historical Verde Valley Populations Figure 2-1. Percent Hispanic Population, 2000 Table 2-3. Median Age of Population in 1990 and 2000 Figure 2-2. Median Age of Population in 2000, in years Figure 2-3. Change in Number of Residents Under 5 Years of Age, 1990-2000 Figure 2-4. Change in Number of Residents 5-19 Years of Age, 1990-2000 Figure 2-5. Change in Number of Residents 20-64 Years of Age, 1990-2000 Figure 2-6. Change in Number of Residents 65 Years and Older, 1990-2000 Table 2-4. Income and Poverty Status, 1999 Table 2-5. Language and Educational Attainment, 2000 Table 2-6. Yavapai-Apache Demographic and Economic Profile, 2000 Table 3-1. Population Projections for the Verde Valley, 2010 and 2020 Table 3-2. Changes in the Level of Employment, 1998-2003 Table 3-3. Unemployment Rates, 2003 Table 3-4. Projected Numbers of New Jobs Necessary in 2010 and 2020 Table 3-5. Housing Affordability Gap, 2000 Table 3-6. Seasonal Housing Units, 2000 Map 3-1. Verde Valley Public Lands Map 3-2. Verde Valley Build-out to 1960 Map 3-3. Verde Valley Build-out to 2003 Table 3-7. Sales Tax Revenues Table A-1. Population, Race, and Hispanic Origin, 2000 Table A-2. Change in Hispanic Population, 1990 to 2000 Table B-1. Population by Selected Age Groups, 2000 Table B-2. Population by Selected Age Groups, 1990 Table C-1. Percent of Civilian Population Age 16 & Older by Industry in Unincorporated Areas, 2000 A|116 Table C-2. Percent of Civilian Population Age 16 & Older by Industry Employment in Incorporated Communities, 2000 |4
2004 Verde Valley Forum
1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
"Sustainable development is development that maintains or enhances economic opportunity and community well-being while protecting and restoring the natural environment upon which people and economies depend." --Minnesota Statutes
1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW It is hard to imagine a more timely, important, and relevant topic for the 2004 Verde Valley Forum than Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy in the Verde Valley. For good or ill, the Verde Valley has been out front as Arizona's rapid growth has continued over the last decade or more. Population growth, higher incomes, demands for more government services, greater economic security, more leisure amenities, increased road congestion, and school crowding the Valley has had its share of all of these plusses and minuses of dramatic change. It's no wonder that Verde Valley residents wonder aloud if they are really controlling their common destiny or simply being buffeted about by winds of change and may be swallowed up eventually as the "state of Maricopa" continues its seemingly inexorable expansion in every direction. It's difficult in this kind of changing setting to lay out proactive strategies to maximize the good and mitigate the evils but the Verde Valley Forum has done it twice in the recent past: first in 1999, when the topic was Controlling our Destiny: Regional Planning and Growth Management and then in 2002, when the topic was Implementing a Verde Valley Open Space Plan. The work of participants at these two Forums helps to set the stage for this year's effort and shows, once again, that the people of the Verde Valley will try to plan for and manage their future. This Report attempts to help Forum participants make informed decisions and policy recommendations for the Verde Valley economy. It begins, in Chapter 2, with a description of the Valley not its rolling hills, rivers and streams, flora and fauna, but a description of its people. How many are there? Where do they live? How old are they? How educated? How diverse is the population? What are personal income levels? How do people live? Before we set out on a journey to explore what we want our economy to be, we need to know more about ourselves. This chapter provides some of this information. In Chapter 3, we speculate on where the economic machine of the Verde Valley seems to be headed based on current trends. It's not a static, unchanging economic world in the Valley and this chapter tries
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
1|7
to capture the impacts of current changes, discussing population, employment, and housing trends. With some information in hand on who we are and where we seem to be headed, we can ask where we really want to go. Five focus groups were conducted over the autumn months of 2003 to gather the views of Verde Valley residents on the nature of sustainable and diversified economy for the region and how the region can achieve that goal. The groups' views are summarized in Chapter 4. Chapter 5 builds on the focus group experience and explores the community values of the region, as expressed in various current documents, plans, and policies. It then discusses that most important step a community or region takes as it tries to articulate its community values into a statement of vision. The process of community visioning is explained in detail and examples of vision statements are presented. With values identified and a values-based vision in place, the region can then take on the planning and implementation of activities that support the vision. While the sequence from values to vision to plans to implementation is a neat, linear, and
1|8
2004 Verde Valley Forum
preferred line of action, we know that the world doesn't always work that way. We expect decision-makers to take action in timely ways, even when community values may be unclear and when a clear statement of vision is lacking. A lot of economic planning and implementation has occurred and is occurring in the Valley and Chapter 6 describes some of these activities. The chapter suggests how principled or values-based planning and implementation achieve the community or regional vision. Finally, Chapter 7 describes some organizational approaches that have been used to implement a strategy to create, maintain, and enhance sustainable and diversified regional economies.
2 GROWTH AND CHANGE IN THE VERDE VALLEY: A DEMOGRAPHIC PORTRAIT OF THE REGION
1917 Main Street, Cottonwood, Arizona Main
1963 West Sedona from Airport Mesa, APS 2004 Old Main Street, Cottonwood, Arizona
1993 West Sedona from Airport Mesa, APS 1910 Verde Valley Cement Factory
2004 Phoenix Cement Factory
Cline Library Special Collections and Archives, Northern Arizona University NAU.PH.86.6.16
Cline Library Special Collections and Archives, Northern Arizona University AHS.0506.00031
2 GROWTH AND CHANGE IN THE VERDE VALLEY: A DEMOGRAPHIC PORTRAIT OF THE REGION As we approach the challenge of achieving a sustainable and diversified economy in the Verde Valley, we need to have a good understanding of exactly where we stand today and where we have come from. What does the region look like in terms of its people and their education, jobs, and incomes? What are the differences within the region in terms of these and other characteristics? What changes are occurring that would affect the deliberations and decisions of Forum participants? These are some of the questions addressed in this opening chapter. Farm Belt or Rust Belt, or perhaps the border regions or the coastal regions. As such, no formal boundaries exist, but at the same time, everyone knows what region is being discussed. The Verde Valley region is shown on Map 2-1.
Definition of the Verde Valley For purposes of data collection for this study, we considered the Verde Valley as the land area encompassed by the Mingus Mountain and Verde Census County Divisions (CCD's) that are used by the U.S. Bureau of the Census. We also added the areas within the incorporated boundaries of that portion of the City of Sedona that exists in Coconino County. Using this definition, the Verde Valley includes the incorporated communities of Camp Verde, Clarkdale, Cottonwood, Jerome, and Sedona as well as the builtup areas in Yavapai County that are commonly referred to as Census Designated Places (CDP's). These areas are Big Park, Cornville, CottonwoodVerde Village, and Lake Montezuma. In addition, the Yavapai-Apache Nation is included. Finally, in 2000 there were an additional 3,267 persons residing on other lands within the two Census County Divisions that are not specifically identified with a place name.
2 | 11
Changes in Population
Throughout the latter half of the twentieth century and continuing to the present, Arizona's population has grown steadily and rapidly. In 1940, there were fewer than half a million people in the state (499,261). By 1960, the state's population had more than doubled to 1,302,161. And by 1980, it had doubled again to 2,718,425. Finally, according to the decennial census, Arizona's population was 5,130,632 in the year 2000. Over this extended period of time, Arizona's metropolitan areas mushroomed and the state is now among the most urbanized in the country. In 1940, 52 percent of Arizona's population was urban (Maricopa and Pima counties). By 1960, this had risen to 74.5 percent and in 2000, 88.2 percent of the state's population was urban (see Table 2-1). For purposes of this analysis, urban is defined by the U.S. Bureau of the
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
Definition of the Verde Valley
The phrase "Verde Valley" may mean different things to different people. Because the region does not possess a unique political status, the boundaries of the Verde Valley are not as easy to identify as they are for incorporated cities or counties. In the regional economics literature, the Verde Valley would be classified as an identifiable region to indicate that the general area is quite homogeneous with reference to its economic or geographic features. Nationally, when we think of homogeneous regions, we speak of the
Table 2-1. Arizona and Yavapai County Populations Geographic Area Arizona Population Urban Population Rural Population Percent Urban Population Percent Rural Population Yavapai County Population Yavapai as a Percent of Arizona Population 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2003 (Estimate)
1,302,161 970,616 331,545 74.5 25.5 28,912 2.2
1,775,399 1,408,864 362,036 79.6 20.4 37,005 2.1
2,718,215 2,278,728 439,487 83.8 16.2 68,145 2.5
3,665,228 3,206,973 458,255 87.5 12.5 107,714 2.9
5,130,632 4,523,535 607,097 88.2 11.8 167,517 3.3
5,629,870 n/a n/a n/a n/a 186,885 3.3
decline in rural populations that plague the Dakotas and other areas of the Midwest. There are growing numbers of citizens in rural Arizona who will seek jobs, provide markets, and demand public services.
Sources: U.S. Bureau of the Census (1960-2000). Arizona Department of Economic Security, 2003.
Arizona's rural counties, taken together, have participated in Arizona's rapid population growth and are projected to continue to do so in the future.
Census as encompassing all areas within the Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA's). In Arizona, Maricopa, Pima, Pinal, Yuma, Mohave, and Coconino counties presently are considered MSA's. At the same time, the state's rural population had declined to 11.8 percent of the state's total by 2000. Measured in percentage terms, the urbanization of Arizona is nearly complete and much of this change occurred some time ago. But this trend is not a result of extremely slow growth or decline in the rural areas of the state. Arizona's rural counties, taken together, have participated in Arizona's rapid population growth and are projected to continue to do so in the future. We are not experiencing the patterns of absolute
2004 Verde Valley Forum
Yavapai County is an example of a rural county with a rapidly growing population. Yavapai County's share of the state's population increased rather steadily over the latter half of the last century. Data in Table 2-1 indicate that Yavapai's population was 2.2 percent of the state total in 1960 and it had risen to 3.3 percent as of 2000. Over this 40-year period, Arizona's population increased by 294 percent while Yavapai County population increased by 479 percent. The Arizona Department of Economic Security (DES) is required to provide annual estimates of population for the state, its counties, and the incorporated communities. The estimated 2003 populations for Arizona and Yavapai County are 5,629,870 and 186,885 respectively. According to these estimates, Yavapai continues to contain 3.3 percent of the state's population.
2 | 12
Changes in population within the Verde Valley are shown in Table 2-2. This table shows the growth in the Verde Valley region's incorporated places as well as in the Census Designated Places (CDPs) and in the Yavapai-Apache Nation. The table provides data for the 1980 2000 period as well as for the most current estimates of population (as of July 1, 2003). The table confirms, with "hard" data, what residents of the region experience in traffic jams, construction delays, longer checkout lines, and increased school enrollments. The Verde Valley population is growing! Interestingly, this population growth is spread rather uniformly throughout the Verde Valley. With the exception of Jerome, the cities of the valley and the CDPs are all experiencing significant growth this is not a situation in which there are declines (or outmigration) in certain areas and offsetting increases in others. Table 2-2 shows that populations in Camp Verde, Cottonwood, and Sedona exceeded 10,000 persons by 2003. Clarkdale's population had reached 3,595 by 2003. Among the incorporated communities, only Jerome has declined since 1980, and housed an estimated 330 persons in 2003. Growth has been extremely rapid on the Yavapai-Apache Nation as well. Over the
20 years from 1980 to 2000, Census figures show a 270 percent increase in population from 200 to 743 persons. Growth in the unincorporated areas of the Verde Valley was also evident over the period. Data for these regions are only available for 1990 and 2000 since DES is not required to provide annual estimates in the intercensal years, and in 1980, these
Table 2-2. Historical Verde Valley Populations Geographic Area Verde Valley Incorporated Places Camp Verde Clarkdale Cottonwood Jerome Sedona (overall) Yavapai-Apache Nation Census Designated Places Big Park, CDP Cornville, CDP Cottonwood-Verde Village, CDP Lake Montezuma, CDP Remainder of Verde Valley Population (in Mingus Mountain and Verde CCD's) Total Verde Valley Population
n/a = Not available
Jerome, 1940, looking up the hill just south of the Montana Hotel
Cline Library Special Collections and Archives, Northern Arizona University NAU.PH.435.14
1980
1990
2000
2003 (Estimate)
3,824 1,512 4,550 420 5,319 200 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
6,243 2,144 5,918 403 7,720 618 3,024 2,089 7,037 1,841 2,596 39,633
9,451 3,422 9,179 329 10,192 743 5,245 3,335 10,610 3,344 3,267 59,117
10,095 3,595 10,240 330 10,700 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Sources: U.S. Bureau of the Census (1980-2000). Arizona Department of Economic Security, 2003.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
2 | 13
Figure 2-1. Percent Hispanic Population, 2000
areas outside of the cities and CDP's) also grew by 45 percent during the 1990 2000 period. This suggests that not only are the incorporated communities and the officially recognized unincorporated places in the region increasing in population, but the entirely rural areas of the valley are also growing at an extremely rapid rate.
Status of Minority Population
Persons in the minority population constitute 10 to 20 percent of the total population in most locations throughout the Verde Valley and in Yavapai County. Minority populations in the two Census County Divisions (CCD's) that make up the Verde Valley exceed the percentage for Yavapai County. In Yavapai, 13.4 percent of the population listed themselves as having minority status in 2000. In the Verde Valley, these figures ranged from a high of 24.0 percent in Cottonwood to a low of 9.2 percent in the Coconino portion of Sedona. Native American populations also vary considerably across the Verde Valley. The overall percentage of Native Americans residing in Yavapai County was only 1.6 percent in 2000. However, the percentages of Native Americans vary from 7.3 percent in Camp Verde and 6.8 percent in Clarkdale
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000. Summary Summary File 1.
...not only are the incorporated communities and the officially recognized unincorporated places in the region increasing in population, but the entirely rural areas of the Valley are also growing at an extremely rapid rate.
2 | 14
areas were not large enough to be reported separately in the Census. However, in the 10-year period from 1990 to 2000, population in each of the four CDP's in the region increased by over fifty percent. Lake Montezuma's increase was the largest, experiencing an almost 82 percent increase. It is also interesting to note that the remainder of the Verde Valley region (those
2004 Verde Valley Forum
to a low of 0.4 percent in Big Park and the Yavapai portion of Sedona. Persons of Hispanic origin make up 9.8 percent of the overall Yavapai population, and numbers range from the highest level in Cottonwood where 20.5 percent of population is of Hispanic descent to a low of 6.5 percent in the Coconino portion of Sedona. The Hispanic populations of Camp Verde, Clarkdale, Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP, and the Yavapai portion of Sedona also exceeded the county average in 2000. Figure 2-1 shows the percentage Hispanic population as a percent of total population in each community in 2000. Additional information on the changing nature of the Hispanic population over the 1990 2000 period is also available in Appendix A.
Table 2-3. Median Age of Population in 1990 and 2000 Median Age in years 1990 Median Age in years 2000 Change in Median Age in Years 2000/1990
Geographic Area Yavapai County Big Park CDP Camp Verde town Clarkdale town Cornville CDP Cottonwood city Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP Jerome town Lake Montezuma CDP Sedona city (overall)
42.3 59.4 41.1 41.1 37.5 38.8 42.1 n/a 51.7 52.0
44.5 55.5 42.0 46.0 41.4 41.0 42.0 46.4 44.7 50.5
2.2 -3.9 0.9 4.9 3.9 2.2 -0.1 -7.0 -1.5
Source: U.S. Census Bureau Census 2000 and 1990, Summary File 1 General Population Characteristics
Changes in the Age Distribution and Median Age
The age distribution has undergone interesting changes in the Verde Valley in the 10 years between 1990 and 2000. Overall, the median age increased; however, this figure has increased in some communities and decreased in others. Furthermore, the percentages of persons within various age groups including those less than five years of age, as well as school age children, older
adults, and persons age 65 and over have all moved in different directions among the various communities in the region. Table 2-3 compares the median age of the resident population for 2000 with 1990 for Yavapai County and for the Verde Valley communities. Over this period, the median age in Yavapai County increased by 2.2 years to 44.5 years. Big Park, Clarkdale, Jerome, Lake Montezuma, and Sedona each recorded median age levels exceeding the county average in 2000. However, it is
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
2 | 15
Figure 2-2. Median Age of Population in 2000, in Years
The largest decrease in median age occurred in Lake Montezuma where the median population age decreased by seven years from 51.7 to 44.7 years. Big Park's average age also dropped by 3.9 years, and the average age in Sedona declined 1.5 years to 50.5. All other areas in the region experienced an increase in median age with the exception of the Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP where the median declined a miniscule 0.1 years. Overall, the oldest community in the region is the Big Park CDP with a median age of 55.5 years. Sedona is the only other place where the median age exceeded 50 years (50.5 years in 2000.) See Figure 2-2 for information showing the median population age by community in 2000. The areas with the youngest population in 2000 were Cottonwood and Cornville where the median ages were 41.0 and 41.4 years, respectively. However, the average age in both of these communities has increased significantly since 1990 when each recorded median age levels in the high thirties (38.8 years in Cottonwood and 37.5 years in Cornville). These increases in average age, however, are the result of the in-migration of more working-age families to these communities, and not a greater
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000. Summary Summary File 1. General Population Characteristics.
significant that the average age in Big Park, Lake Montezuma, and Sedona, although higher than the county average, was decreasing during this period, while the average age in Clarkdale was increasing. This suggests that persons migrating into the former areas are, on average, younger than the typical resident in 1990, while Clarkdale is attracting persons whose average age exceeds that of those already residing there.
2 | 16
2004 Verde Valley Forum
number of retiree-aged populations. This phenomenon is confirmed in Tables B-1 and B-2 in Appendix B, and sheds an interesting perspective on the changing population distribution across the Verde Valley region. Appendix B contains detailed information regarding which population age groups are growing most rapidly within each community in the Verde Valley. Within the Verde Valley all communities experienced increases in the percentage of working age population. However, Big Park, Camp Verde, Cornville and the Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP come closest to mirroring what is going on in the county. In each of these communities as well as in the county, the percentage of persons under five years decreased along with the percentage of those aged 65 and over. At the same time, the percent of those aged 20-64 increased.
Figure 2-3. Change in Number of Residents Under 5 Years of Age, 1990-2000
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000. Population by Sex and Age.
Clarkdale and Jerome were similar to the county in that the percentage of the population under five years of age decreased while the working-age population percentages increased in these areas. However, the percentage of retirement-age persons increased rather than decreased in these two locations.
In Cottonwood, Lake Montezuma, and Sedona, the percentage of the population under five years of age increased while the working and retirement age groups each increased as a percent of total population. Therefore, there is no common denominator with respect to the age distribution changes among the various Verde Valley
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
...there is no common denominator with respect to the age distribution changes among the various Verde Valley communities.
2 | 17
Figure 2-4. Change in Number of Residents 5-19 Years of Age, 1990-2000
persons diminish over the ten years while the remaining five areas experienced increases in the relative importance of this age group. No common theme is evident here except that a larger number of families moving into the Clarkdale, Cornville, Cottonwood, and Jerome areas appear to have fewer children compared with those families moving into the remaining communities in the region. The above analysis has focused almost exclusively on the relative size of the various cohorts in the Verde Valley. However, the absolute size of these cohorts over time is also significant. Figures 2-3 to 2-6 provide data that show the absolute increase or decline in the number of persons in each age cohort over the 1990 2000 period. Figure 2-3, for example, shows these changes for persons under five years of age. The largest increase was in Cottonwood where this group increased by 227 persons over the 10 years. With the exception of Jerome, all communities in the region gained population in the under-5 age group. Figure 2-4 provides similar information for persons in the 5-19 age group. As
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000. Population by Sex and Age.
communities. Some communities are experiencing greater importance in the under-5 group while others are trending toward more retirement-age groups. At the same time, the percentage of the school-age population (5-19 years) has also diverged among the communities. Clarkdale, Cornville, Cottonwood, and Jerome saw the percent of school-age
2 | 18
2004 Verde Valley Forum
noted above, the percentage of school-age persons compared to all persons in Clarkdale, Cornville, Cottonwood, and Jerome diminished over the 10 years; however, from this figure we see that the absolute number of persons in this schoolage group has increased over this period. Cottonwood-Verde Village experienced a 798-person increase in school-age children while Camp Verde experienced a 719-person gain. Clarkdale's increase was 160 persons. Only Jerome experienced a decrease among this group, losing 22 persons. Figure 2-5 shows the absolute increase in population for the cohort that grew by the greatest amount over this period the age group comprising 20-64 year-old persons. Although this group increased in size in all communities except in Jerome, the increase was not evenly distributed across the region. The increases in Cottonwood-Verde Village and Sedona were 1,985 and 1,913 respectively. The increase in persons in 20-64 age cohort in Cottonwood (1,769) and Camp Verde (1,765) were also significant. However, as is apparent in Figure 5, increases in the other four communities, although positive, were considerably smaller, and Jerome experienced a loss of 30 persons in this age group.
Figure 2-5. Change in Number of Residents 20-64 Years of Age, 1990-2000
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000. Population by Sex and Age.
Figure 2-6 provides the change in population for those persons age 65 years and older. Over the 1990-2000 period, Cottonwood's population increased by 704 persons for this group. Cottonwood-Verde Village was close behind with 601 more persons age 65 and older. Big Park and Camp Verde also experienced increases approaching 600 persons in this age group.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
2 | 19
Figure 2-6. Change in Number of Residents 65 Years and Older, 1990-2000
income data for the Verde Valley communities in 1999. The percentage of persons whose incomes are below the poverty level is also shown. (Latest census data report income levels from 1999, since the information was gathered prior to the end of 2000.) These figures reflect the considerable variation among the region's communities with respect to the income distribution within the local area. Median household income in Sedona is highest in the region. Residents in the Coconino portion received $46,512 in 1999. This amount was over $3,000 above income levels in the Yavapai portion of Sedona ($43,258). These numbers compare with a county-wide household income average of $34,901, and a statewide average of $40,558. Big Park households received the second highest income ($38,477) while Cornville residents received incomes considerably above the county average ($36,992). Household incomes in the CottonwoodVerde Village CDP and in Clarkdale were marginally above the Yavapai average ($35,075 and $34,911, respectively). Incomes in the remaining communities were substantially below the county average.
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000. Population by Sex and Age.
However, Sedona's increase was only 171, which exceeded only Cornville (142) and Lake Montezuma (97), as well as Jerome where the number of persons in this cohort declined by nine.
Income and Poverty Status
Table 2-4 provides a snapshot of median household income as well as per capita
2 | 20
2004 Verde Valley Forum
Camp Verde incomes averaged $31,868 while the average income in Jerome was $27,857; Cottonwood household income was $27,444 and in Lake Montezuma the figure was $33,750. Quite a different picture emerges when we look at per capita incomes in these communities. Sedona's Coconino population still recorded the highest per capita income, earning an average of $34,246. The per capita incomes of Big Park residents ($30,026) were essentially the same as those in Sedona Yavapai portion ($30,162). These numbers are substantially higher than the county average ($19,727) and statewide ($20,275).
Table 2-4. Income and Poverty Status, 1999 Median Household Income 1999 ($) Per Capita Income 1999 ($) Percent of Population Below Poverty Level 1999
Geographic Area Arizona Yavapai County Mingus Mountain CCD Verde CCD Big Park CDP Camp Verde town Clarkdale town Cornville CDP Cottonwood city Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP Jerome town Lake Montezuma CDP Sedona city (part) Sedona city (Coconino)
40,558 34,901 32,337 36,202 38,477 31,868 34,911 36,992 27,444 35,075 27,857 33,750 43,258 46,512
20,275 19,727 17,712 21,647 30,026 15,072 18,441 16,500 17,518 16,734 19,967 17,043 30,162 34,246
13.9 11.9 10.7 12.3 8.4 14.0 10.3 15.9 13.5 8.7 15.1 9.1 10.2 8.5
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 3, Matrices P53, P77, P82, P87, P90, PCT47, PCT52. Note: Personal Income includes wages, salaries, other labor income, proprietor's income, rental income, transfer payments, less personal contributions to social insurance. For poverty definitions and methodology, see the Census Bureau's "Current Population Reports," Series P-60.
Per capita incomes in Jerome were third highest ($19,967) and Clarkdale's figure was $18,441. The numbers are lowest in Camp Verde where per capita income averaged $15,072 in 2000. Why is there a difference in rankings among communities when we look at per capita income as opposed to household incomes? The most likely conclusion is
that individuals in one-person households earn higher average incomes than at least one and perhaps both members of twoperson households. This suggests that single person households in the Verde Valley communities are among the highest income earning households.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
2 | 21
Census data also capture the percentage of population below the government-defined poverty level. Statewide, 13.9 percent of all individuals were listed as having incomes below the poverty level in 1999. In Yavapai County, this percentage falls to 11.9 percent, and the majority of communities in the Verde Valley contained even smaller percentages below the poverty level. The community with the lowest incidence of poverty was Big Park (8.4 percent of residents). Figures for Sedona (Coconino) and Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP were also below nine percent. The highest rates in the region were in Cornville (15.9), Jerome (15.1), and Camp Verde (14.0).
average although the figure for Cottonwood was 16.8 percent which was the highest in the region. Education attainment for persons age 25 and over is also available from the Census data. Table 2-5 provides education measures that show the percentage of the population in each community that had less than a ninthgrade education in 2000, the percentage who completed high school or higher education, and the percentage who had completed a bachelor's degree or higher. Residents within the Verde Valley communities were more likely to have completed high school than their statewide counterparts, but less likely to have completed a bachelor's degree or higher levels of education. The percentage of persons with less than a ninth-grade education statewide was 7.8 percent in 2000. This figure was only 4.6 percent in Yavapai County. In Jerome, all residents age 25 and above reported at least having completed nine years of education. The percentage of persons age 25 and above in Arizona who had completed high school by 2000 was 81.0. In Yavapai, the figure increases to 84.7. In the Verde Valley, these numbers ranged from a high of 96.6 percent in the Sedona-Coconino area and
Language and Educational Attainment
The percentage of the population age five and older who speak a language other than English at home is quite low across all areas of the Verde Valley when compared to the overall statewide average. In Arizona, over 25 percent of the residents fall into this category. The number in Yavapai County; however, is only 9.7 percent. This percentage drops to 7.7 percent in Cornville and 6.3 percent in Sedona-Coconino. (See Table 2-5.) The percentages in most of the Verde Valley communities slightly exceeded the county
2 | 22
2004 Verde Valley Forum
93.4 percent in Jerome, to a low of 77.0 percent in Cottonwood and 78.1 percent in Camp Verde. The overall percentage of high school graduates in the Verde Valley was approximately 83 percent, which is just below the 84.7 percent for the county.
Table 2-5. Language and Educational Attainment, 2000 Percent of Population Age 5 & Over Who Speak Other than English at Home Population 25 Years and Over in 2000 % High School % with < 9th Graduate or % with Bachelor's Grade Education Higher Degree or Higher
Geographic Area Arizona Yavapai County Mingus Mountain CCD Verde CCD Big Park CDP Camp Verde town Clarkdale town Cornville CDP Cottonwood city Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP Jerome town Lake Montezuma CDP
25.9 9.7 12.7 11.5 10.0 9.8 11.7 7.7 16.8 11.2 14.4 11.2
7.8 4.6 5.8 5.2 2.6 8.2 4.0 5.0 9.2 4.2 0.0 6.4
81.0 84.7 82.4 83.5 91.1 78.1 83.9 78.9 77.0 84.7 93.4 79.4
23.5 21.1 16.7 25.9 40.8 11.8 19.8 15.2 13.9 16.6 31.7 20.7 37.5 43.2
However, the percentages diverge signifiSedona city (part) 14.5 2.6 88.4 cantly when we Sedona city (Coconino) 6.3 0.3 96.6 turn to higher education. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 3, Matrices P19, P36, P37, P38, PCT24, PCT25. Statewide, 23.5 percent of lower in most of the remaining local comArizona residents 25 years and older had munities including Camp Verde (11.8%), completed a bachelor's degree or higher Cottonwood (13.9%), and Cornville (15.2%). level of education by 2000. County-wide, the percentage was 21.1. The only communities In the Verde Valley, a strong correlation in the Verde Valley that exceeded the is apparent between age, income, and county average were Sedona Coconino education. Communities with the higher (43.2%), Sedona Yavapai (37.5%), Big Park median age population, tended to be the (40.8%), and Jerome (31.7%). This level of ones with the higher per capita incomes and educational attainment was considerably higher education as well.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
2 | 23
Profile of the Yavapai-Apache Nation
Census information is also collected and published for persons residing on the tribal reservations across the U.S. However, in many instances, the published format does not follow the same pattern as exists for cities and counties. In addition, some of the tribal regions contain so few persons that disclosure prevents the publication and dissemination of some of the information. However, the data related to the YavapaiApache Reservation in Table 2-6 were assembled and published by Elliott Pollack and Pat Schroeder for use in the Arizona Statewide Economic Study 2002. This information in the table contains similar
Table 2-6. Yavapai-Apache Demographic and Economic Profile, 2000 Population Percent of AZ total tribal population Percent of population under age 20 Percent of population age 20-54 Percent of population over age 54 Median age, years Employment (number) Unemployment rate Median household income Percent of state median household income Percent of population below poverty level
content to that presented earlier for other communities in the region. Compared with many tribal areas in the state, Yavapai-Apache is very small. The resident population in 2000 was 743 persons or 0.4 percent of Arizona's total tribal population. Over 45 percent of the tribal residents were under age 20 in 2000 and an additional 42.1 percent were between ages 20 and 54 years. The median age was 23.5 years, which makes it the youngest community in the Verde Valley region. The percentage of tribal residents with a high school diploma in 2000 was 54.5 percent; the age of those with a college degree was 13.1 percent. Median household income on the reservation was $24,583, which is about 61 percent of the statewide median and 70 percent of the Yavapai County average income. The percentage of the population below the U.S. defined poverty level was 30.8 percent in 2000. This figure is in contrast to the 11.9 percent overall poverty rate in Yavapai County.
743 0.4 45.5 42.1 12.4 23.5 216 12.7 $24,583 60.6 30.8
Summary
The diversity as well as the similarity among communities is apparent as we analyze the information contained in the tables in this chapter. Each community is unique within the region with respect to age, income, and education; however, similarities also exist in that no community is dominant in terms of overall population size.
Sources: U.S. Bureau of the Census & Elliott D. Pollack & Co. and Pat Schroeder, Practical Solutions. Arizona Statewide Economic Study 2002
2 | 24
2004 Verde Valley Forum
3 THE PRESENT SETTING AND FUTURE IMPLICATIONS
The long-run challenge is to produce an economically, environmentally, and aesthetically viable region.
3 THE PRESENT SETTING AND FUTURE IMPLICATIONS
Projecting the future population of the Verde Valley is difficult. The region is small and experiences high levels of inand out-migration to and from the area. Migration trends are typically influenced by factors such as the economic strength of the larger economy, local climate, past migration trends, changes in the attraction (or pull-factor) of a local area, and numerous additional economic and non-economic considerations. But even if accurate projections are difficult to make, it's still helpful to see where the region may be headed, especially since sustainability of such trends is in question.
Any number of approaches can be used to project the future population for the region; however, if we simply increase the 1997 official projections by the 6.8 percent underestimation that existed by 2000, the entire Verde Valley region would be home to 74,621 persons by 2010. This represents an increase of 15,750 persons since 2000 (an increase of almost 27 percent in 10 years.) If we extend the projections out to 2020, the Verde Valley population (when adjusted for the 6.8 percent undercount) would reach 90,029. This results in an increase of 53 percent or over 31,000 more persons than lived here in 2000. These population projections for the individual communities within the Verde Valley are shown in Table 3-1 for both 2010 and 2020. The numbers for each community were generated using the same approach for the entire region, and reflect the official state projections made in 1997 adjusted for the 6.8 percent undercount that was evident by 2000. By 2020, the size as well as the individual character of many of the communities will change considerably. If these population projections hold true, Cottonwood will be the largest city in the
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
Projected Increases in Overall Population
Official population projections for Arizona have not been updated by the State Department of Economic Security since 1997. Furthermore, the 1997 projections were too conservative when evaluated against the actual population change that has occurred since the projections were made. In 2000, the official census figures for the Verde Valley were already 6.8 percent higher than the 1997 projections for the region for the year 2000.
If these population projections hold true, Cottonwood will be the largest city in the region and will be home to 16,283 persons. Sedona will have 15,605 persons, and Camp Verde would closely follow with 15,025 residents.
3 | 27
Table 3-1. Population Projections for the Verde Valley, 2010 and 2020 Geographic Area Verde Valley Incorporated Places Camp Verde Clarkdale Cottonwood Jerome Sedona (overall) Yavapai-Apache Nation Census Designated Places Big Park, CDP Cornville, CDP Cottonwood-Verde Village, CDP Lake Montezuma, CDP Remainder of Verde Valley Population (in Mingus Mountain and Verde CCD's) Total Verde Valley Population 2000 Projected Population 2010 2020
9,451 3,422 9,179 329 10,192 743
12,183 4,199 11,480 733 13,222 904
15,025 5,111 16,283 824 15,605 1,031
and long-run time frames. The short-run challenge, which primarily takes into account year-to-year changes, focuses on identifying sufficient numbers of jobs to meet the needs of an ever-increasing and changing labor force, as well as keeping up with construction demands, not only for new homes, but also for new schools, roads, medical facilities, and maintaining sufficient sewer and water capacity for the expanding number of the businesses and households located within the region. The long-run challenge is to produce an economically, environmentally, and aesthetically viable region that not only meets the ongoing short-run challenges, but also successfully addresses the changes in the region's character and in its economic, cultural, and social characteristics that are sure to occur within the rapidly growing region. While measurement and assessment of groundwater resources and uses is not the topic of this Report, it is clear that if rapid population growth continues, increasing attention must be devoted to groundwater issues in the near future. Many of these challenges have already been identified by various leaders and residents living within the Verde Valley. Achieving sustainable economic development will depend upon how these challenges are met. Examples of the challenges include:
5,245 3,335 10,610 3,344 3,267 59,117
6,747 4,429 10,905* 3,285 6,252 74,339
8,551 5,557 10,905* 3,962 6,838 89,692
*Cottonwood-Verde Village was projected to be 100% built out by 2005. Source: Arizona Department of Economic Security Research Administration Population Statistics Unit (Increased by 6.8% as explained in the text above.)
region and will be home to 16,283 persons. Sedona will have 15,605 persons, and Camp Verde would closely follow with 15,025 residents.
The Challenges of Rapid Population Growth
Changes in population size of this magnitude pose challenges for both short
3 | 28
2004 Verde Valley Forum
confronting urban sprawl developing transportation corridors implementing a regional approach to the planning process proposing changes in land use and exchange meeting the social and cultural appetites of new and changing populations over time. Some of these challenges have been the subject of previous Verde Valley Forums regional planning and growth management in 1999 and implementing a regional open space plan in 2002. The Verde Valley Land Preservation Institute was formed after the 2002 Forum in order to acquire, manage, and enhance the natural open space in the Region. This organization is an example of how the local area is attempting to attain sustainable economic development by meeting today's needs while preserving portions of the natural environment to meet the needs of future residents as well.
numbers of aging baby-boomers, and how these changes in the nation's demographics will impact the health care facilities, the housing sector, and the local workforce. Other studies that have addressed these issues include the recently completed 82nd Arizona Town Hall, which focused specifically on the needs of the elderly and health care options as the population ages. The average age within a region will increase over time due to the demographic aging of its existing residents or as a result of increased in-migration of elderly persons into the region. Not all areas are impacted to the same extent by elderly migration; however, Arizona and Nevada in the West, and Florida and North Carolina in the East, are among the leaders in attracting elderly migrants. For the most part, the majority of these migrants tend to be white, welleducated, and typically have higher-thanaverage incomes. Migrant streams in the future are likely to differ from the past as life expectancy differentials among racial groups decline. However, the education and income status of future migrants may be increasingly diverse as many future migrants may possess lower education and income levels when compared with past and present migrants. The elderly population in Arizona, and specifically in Yavapai County, is projected
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
The long-run challenge is to produce an economically, environmentally, and aesthetically viable region that not only meets the ongoing short-run challenges, but also successfully addresses the changes in the region's character and in its economic, cultural, and social characteristics that are sure to occur within the rapidly growing region.
Changes in the Older Population
The Verde Valley, along with Arizona and the nation, will also be dramatically affected by the general aging of the population. Considerable research at the national and state level has focused on the impacts of increased longevity and the increased
3 | 29
An aging population places new and increasing demands on local medical and health care facilities.
The importance of recreation and tourism along with health, education, and social services is apparent throughout the county and Verde Valley. The percentage of the population employed in these specific industries is either the highest or second highest amount in each of the communities in the region.
to dramatically increase during the first five decades of the twenty-first century. Numbers from the 2000 census showed Yavapai County had 36,816 persons age 65 and over. About 35 percent of these persons resided in the Verde Valley. The Arizona Department of Economic Security projects the number of persons age 65 and older in Yavapai County to increase to 53,041 by 2010 and to 75,884 in 2020. By 2050, this number could swell to 111,982. If the Verde Valley maintains its current share of the elderly population, by 2050, this area will be home to over 39,000 persons who are at least 65 years of age. An aging population places new and increasing demands on local medical and health care facilities. Variations in housing size and structure along with the types of recreation and entertainment demanded will also change. In addition, many of these individuals will continue to be employed, or will plan to be employed beyond age 65. These changes pose interesting challenges and opportunities for the Verde Valley communities. Many of these issues may be more easily addressed through a cooperative regional approach, and will require increased attention as the size of the elderly population continues to rise over the next 50 years.
The following sections in this chapter examine many of these topics, including the employment and housing conditions in the Verde Valley.
Employment by Industry in the Verde Valley
Tables C-1 and C-2 in Appendix C provide a profile of the Verde Valley region's industry by examining the number of persons employed in each category in 2000. The percentage of the local population employed in each industry is shown for the county and for each of the nine separate cities, towns and CDP's in the Verde Valley. Percentages for Yavapai County and the four CDP's appear in Table C-1. Table C-2 provides similar data for the five incorporated communities in the region. The importance of recreation and tourism and health, education and social services is apparent throughout the county and Verde Valley. The percentage of the population employed in these specific industries is either the highest or second highest amount in each of the communities in the region. The industries employing the greatest numbers of persons in each community are shown.
3 | 30
2004 Verde Valley Forum
Employment by Industry Location Yavapai County:
Largest Industries measured by employment in each Education, health and social services (19.9% of total county employment) Retail Trade (13.5% of total county employment) Big Park: Arts, recreation, food and lodging (18.5%) Professional, scientific, and administrative services (15.2%) Cornville: Construction (16.7%) Education, health and social services (16.2%) Cottonwood-Verde Village: Education, health and social services (21.9%) Retail Trade (15.8%) Lake Montezuma: Arts, recreation, food and lodging (27.1%) Education, health and social services (15.3%) Camp Verde: Arts, recreation, food and lodging (17.9%) Education, health and social services (15.8%) Clarkdale: Education, health and social services (20.2%) Construction (14.3%) Cottonwood: Education, health and social services (18.2%) Arts, recreation, food and lodging (16.9%) Jerome: Retail Trade (24.7%) Arts, recreation, food and lodging (21.6%) Sedona: Arts, recreation, food and lodging (19.6%) Education, health and social services (13.9%) Retail Trade (13.9%) It is also interesting to show where each industry is most important. This breakout is shown in the next box. For example, the percentage of persons employed in agriculture, forestry, and mining is higher in Cornville and Camp Verde than in any other locations in the Verde Valley. In each of these communities, 2.4 percent of the labor force is employed in these sectors. Construction employs a higher percentage of Cornville's workers compared to anywhere else, while manufacturing is highest in Cottonwood, etc. The relative importance of each industry in each community varies significantly as is apparent from the information shown here.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
...the percentage of persons employed in agriculture, forestry, and mining is higher in Cornville and Camp Verde than in any other locations in the Verde Valley.
3 | 31
Industry Agriculture, forestry & mining: Construction: Manufacturing: Wholesale trade: Retail trade: Transportation & utilities: Information: Finance, insurance, and real estate: Professional, scientific & administrative services:
Community with highest employment in each sector Cornville (2.4% of all employment in Cornville) Camp Verde (2.4% of all employment in Camp Verde) Cornville (16.7%) Clarkdale (14.3%) Cottonwood (9.3%) Cornville (8.4%) Cornville (4.4%) Cottonwood-Verde Village (4.0%) Jerome (24.7%) Cottonwood (16.0% Camp Verde (6.1%) Cottonwood (5.2%) Sedona (4.2%) Big Park (3.6%) Big Park (11.5%) Sedona (8.9%)
Big Park (15.2%) Sedona (11.1%) Education, health & social services: Cottonwood-Verde Village (21.9%) Clarkdale (20.2%) Arts, recreation, food & lodging: Lake Montezuma (27.1%) Jerome (21.6%) Other services: Sedona (8.0%) Cornville (7.3%) Public administration: Camp Verde (7.5%) Clarkdale (6.7%)
The Current State of Employment and Labor in the Verde Valley
One way to gauge the economic health of a region is to contrast employment conditions in the local area over time. Here, we focus on changes in employment over
3 | 32
2004 Verde Valley Forum
the past five years as well as the current unemployment rates for all communities in the Verde Valley region. Five years is long enough to examine the impacts of changes that might be associated with purely cyclical activity affecting these numbers.
Both the level of employment and the rate of unemployment are often used to measure the economic health of a community or region. Data in Table 3-2 are used to compare employment levels in 1998 with 2003 (through October) for all communities in the region. As we see in Table 3-2, employment in the region has increased significantly over these five years. On average, there was a 24.4 percent increase in local employment throughout the Verde Valley. The distribution of employment is also important when we consider the location of jobs within the region. The area in and around Cottonwood provided the highest levels of employment with 9,113 positions. Cottonwood-Verde Village had 5,039 workers in 2003, and the City of Cottonwood provided an additional 4,074 jobs. The employment level in Sedona was 6,063 jobs in 2003, and Camp Verde offered employment to 4,081 persons. Employment in each of the other locations was substantially lower than in Cottonwood, Sedona, and Camp Verde, yet still was significant overall. These numbers suggest that employment within the region is concentrated in three primary hubs along with additional jobs that are distributed throughout the region to meet the needs
of local residents and provide services to tourists in the region. Employment in all areas increased over this period. The largest increase occurred in Sedona where 1,131 new jobs were added over the five years. Cottonwood-Verde Village added 989 jobs and the City of Cottonwood added 799 new jobs between 1998 and 2003.
...employment within the region is concentrated in three primary hubs along with additional jobs that are distributed throughout the region to meet the needs of local residents and provide services to tourists in the region.
Table 3-2. Changes in the Level of Employment, 1998 2003 Number of Persons Employed 1998 2003* Change in Employment
Geographic Area Yavapai County Big Park, CDP Camp Verde Clarkdale Cornville, CDP Cottonwood Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP Jerome Lake Montezuma, CDP Sedona (Overall) Yavapai-Apache Reservation
65,891 1,901 3,280 1,291 1,467 3,275 4,050 345 986 4,932 227
81,976 2,365 4,081 1,606 1,826 4,074 5,039 428 1,226 6,063 272
16,085 464 801 315 359 799 989 83 240 1,131 45
*Employment levels for 2003 represent an average through October. Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, and Arizona Department of Economic Security. Note: Employment estimates were first calculated for the county and the subcounty numbers were estimated from county figures using a census share methodology employed at BLS.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
3 | 33
Table 3-3 provides a better indicator of the relationship Unemployment Rates (%) between the Geographic Area 2003* supply and Yavapai County 3.3 demand for workers in each Big Park, CDP 0.2 Camp Verde 2.9 community. Clarkdale 4.5 The low Cornville, CDP 3.6 unemployment rates in Sedona Cottonwood 4.3 (1.7%) and in Cottonwood-Verde Village CDP 3.4 Big Park (0.2%) Jerome 2.8 Lake Montezuma, CDP 3.4 suggest that Sedona (Yavapai) 1.7 number of persons seeking Yavapai-Apache Reservation 11.4 employment in these areas is just *Unemployment rates for 2003 represent an average through October. above the level Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, of demand for and Arizona Department of Economic Security. workers which is indicative of an extremely vibrant labor market. The unemployment rates in Jerome (2.8%) and Overall, however, the Camp Verde (2.9%) are also below the level employment market within overall rate for Yavapai County (3.3%).
Table 3-3. Unemployment Rates, 2003
Overall, however, the employment market within the Verde Valley has to be considered among the most favorable anywhere in the state and nation. Unemployment in Arizona averaged 5.8 percent over the first ten months of 2003. Nationally, unemployment in 2003 ranged from 5.7 percent in January to 6.4 percent in June. The only location in the Verde Valley that exceeded the state and national unemployment rates in 2003 was the Yavapai-Apache Reservation, where unemployment averaged 11.4 percent over this period.
Projected Number of New Jobs Required in the Region
Projections of the future Verde Valley population for the years 2010 and 2020 were presented earlier in the Chapter. What do these population projections imply for job creation? That is the subject for this section. In effect, we are asking whether job seekers will find employment in the Verde Valley or try to find jobs elsewhere. To get an estimate of the number of jobs that need to be created, we first look back at the 2000 census and obtain the ratio of persons employed to total population in each Verde Valley community and census designated place (CDP). The years 1999 and 2000 were good years nationally and in Arizona and they approximate years of full employment.
the Verde Valley has to be considered among the most favorable anywhere in the state and nation.
The rates in the remaining communities within the region are more in line with the county average and indicative of a more normal employment environment when compared with similar locations across the nation.
2004 Verde Valley Forum
3 | 34
We then take those employment to population ratios for each community and apply them to the projected populations shown in Table 3-1. The resulting figures show how many new jobs must be created by the years 2010 and 2020 to maintain the employment situation that existed back in 2000. That information is shown in Table 3-4. For example, in Camp Verde, 1,080 new jobs must be created between 2000 and 2010 so the same percentage of the population that was employed in 2000 is still employed in 2010. Camp Verde is projected to continue to increase in population and in 2020; a total of 2,203 jobs more than the level in 2000 must be created to keep the employment to population ratio steady. The total number of new jobs necessary across the Valley is 5,208 by 2010 and 11,350 by 2020 to keep this employment to population ratio the same as it was in the year 2000. Creating these new jobs and achieving a more diversified and sustainable economy represent a challenge to the residents of the Verde Valley.
market in the Verde Valley. Some of the more prominent issues focus on affordable housing and seasonal housing. The following sections rely upon census information to portray the existing situation in the Verde Valley on both these topics.
Table 3-4. Projected Numbers of New Jobs Necessary
in 2010 and 2020
Geographic Area Verde Valley Incorporated Places Camp Verde Clarkdale Cottonwood Jerome Sedona (overall) Census Designated Places Big Park, CDP Cornville, CDP Cottonwood-Verde Village, CDP Lake Montezuma, CDP
New Jobs Needed: In In 2010 2020
1,080 325 909 233 1,462
2,203 706 2,806 286 2,611
Affordable Housing
581 520 125 -26
1,279 1,055 125 278
Housing
Housing and changes in housing stock, along with availability and price, are all important elements in a growing and vibrant economy. These are but a few issues that arise when we analyze the housing
Total Jobs needed in all communities: 5,208 11,350 The Arizona Source: Calculations based on employment and labor force Housing Cominformation from Census 2000. mission and the Arizona Department of Housing in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development have recently completed an Arizona Affordable Housing Profile. This study offers a detailed examination of the housing stock for all of Arizona, and measures the affordability of housing for each incorporated community in the state.
Their study identifies the "affordability gap" that exists in each location. This gap is defined as "the difference between
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
3 | 35
Affordable housing thus becomes everyone's problem, not just the poorest households.
the number of households within each income range and the number of housing units affordable to those households." For households in this category to obtain housing in their community, they will either have to pay more than the normal 28 percent of their income for shelter, or they are forced to live in substandard or overcrowded housing conditions. The size of this household gap is measured for each community. Their most recent study was completed in 2002, and measures the gap for the year 2000 (Arizona Affordable Housing Profile: Findings and Conclusions 2002).
Statewide, the size of the gap was almost 195,000 households, or approximately 10.3 percent of all households; however, in Yavapai Table 3-5. Housing Affordability Gap, 2000 County, the gap was Gap as a 17.1 percent or 11,949 Percent Total Gap of Total households. This means Geographic Area (households) Households that affordable housing Sedona 2,301 46.7 presents a greater problem Camp Verde 818 22.6 for Yavapai County than it Clarkdale 254 17.7 does statewide.
Jerome Cottonwood Unincorporated Yavapai County
impacts other families higher on the income scale. This occurs when the poorer families are forced to pay more than the 28 percent threshold income level to secure housing, and in the process they occupy homes that would normally be available to persons with higher incomes. This shifts the problem up the income ladder and creates an imbalance between the supply and demand for homes for families at all income levels. Specifically, this occurs because the amount of affordable housing available to each income group will be partially used up or occupied by persons in the next lower level of income who have to spend more than they should to secure housing. This action "crowds out" the housing stock and forces people at each income level to look for more expensive housing. Affordable housing thus becomes everyone's problem, not just the poorest households. Using this approach, researchers who compiled the housing profile calculated the "affordability gap" for each of the five incorporated communities in the Verde Valley as well as an overall aggregate average for the unincorporated regions in Yavapai County. These results are presented in Table 3-5. The affordability gap is highest in Sedona where 46.7 percent of households fall within this category. A total of 2,301 households in
31 377
17.2 9.5 15.1
3,583
Source: Arizona Affordable Housing Profile: 2002. Arizona Housing Commission, Arizona Department of Housing, and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Furthermore, affordable housing is not just a concern for the poorest of households. The lack of affordable homes for the lowest income groups
3 | 36
2004 Verde Valley Forum
Sedona were listed as being unable to secure adequate housing without paying more than 28 percent of their 2000 incomes for shelter. Although Sedona's numbers are the highest for the Verde Valley, the affordability gap in each of the remaining communities, except for Cottonwood, exceeds the statewide average of 10.3 percent. In Camp Verde, this gap is 22.6 percent or 818 households. In Clarkdale, 17.7 percent or 254 households cannot find affordable homes. In Jerome, 17.2 percent or 31 households fall into this category. In the unincorporated regions of the entire county, the figures are 15.1 percent or 3,583 households. The numbers are lowest in Cottonwood, where 377 households and 9.5 percent of households could not secure adequate housing. A high affordability gap is not surprising for communities in a rapidly growing region since the increasing numbers of new residents into the area place ongoing pressures on the construction sector to build new homes. Given that new homes typically are priced higher than existing homes, overall average housing costs in an expanding region are higher than in other regions, and the affordability gap continues to worsen over time.
Seasonal Housing
Seasonal housing is a generic term used by many researchers to measure the number of "second homes" in a region. The Census Bureau uses the phrase "seasonal, recreational and occasional use" to describe the portion of homes in an area that fall into this category. In 2000, the Census Bureau classified 6,048 homes in Yavapai County as seasonal or second homes. This number was 7.4 percent of the total homes in the county.
Table 3-6. Seasonal Housing Units, 2000 Seasonal Housing Units Percent Seasonal Use
Geographic Area Yavapai County Big Park, CDP Camp Verde Clarkdale Cornville, CDP Cottonwood Cottonwood-Verde Village, CDP Jerome Lake Montezuma Sedona (all)
6,048 254 136 22 45 53 43 15 78 446
7.4% 8.1% 3.4% 1.4% 3.1% 1.2% 1.0% 7.7% 4.7% 7.8%
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Table DP-1: Profile of General Demographic Characteristics
The largest number of second homes in the Verde Valley was in Sedona where 446 homes and 7.8 percent of all homes were considered seasonal. Big Park had 254 seasonal homes representing 8.1 percent of all homes in that area. Fifteen homes or 7.7 percent of all houses in Jerome were also used for seasonal purposes. These numbers are shown in Table 3-6. The percentage of second homes in each of these three areas exceeded the
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
A high affordability gap is not surprising for communities in a rapidly growing region since the increasing numbers of new residents into the area place ongoing pressures on the construction sector to build new homes. Given that new homes typically are priced higher than existing homes, overall average housing costs in an expanding region are higher than in other regions, and the affordability gap continues to worsen over time.
3 | 37
overall county rate. The number and percentage of seasonal housing units in the remaining locations within the Verde Valley; however, were considerably below the county percentage. Cottonwood and Cottonwood-Verde Village had few second homes, averaging only slightly more than one percent of total residences in these communities. The variation in these numbers suggests that although almost 1,100 of region's homes are used for seasonal purposes, the distribution of these homes varies widely across the area. Many reasons could explain the differential; however, scenic views and higher land prices are often associated with more seasonal homes, while increased proximity to work and better access to schools might explain the presence of more year-round homes in any particular location.
new housing project or the positioning of a new road within the region. Planners and citizens alike will be able to use easyto-understand graphics that describe the long-term impacts of these events before a project is ever started. In fact, the County and Camp Verde have purchased the SGM software and have trained staff to utilize its forecasting potential. This will provide an invaluable resource to the region since land holdings and their changing uses over time represent an area of increasing interest and concern for Verde Valley residents. The 2002 Verde Valley Forum examined the feasibility of implementing a Verde Valley Open Space Plan. The General Plans for all the region's incorporated communities make extensive references to open space as view sheds, greenbelts, riparian areas, and a host of alternative means to protect and preserve land areas in their current uses. Some of the plans include formal definitions of open space, others do not; however, the importance of these uses is apparent throughout all areas within the Verde region. Private property makes up only about 17 percent of the Valley's land area. National Forest properties comprise 80 percent of the region's land base, and State Trust Lands occupy the remaining 3 percent.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
Land Use and Exchange
Verde Valley residents may soon be able to draw upon a newly emerging tool to measure the impact of proposed projects on existing lands. This tool, called Spatial Growth Modeling (SGM) was developed at Prescott College, and utilizes NASA technology to provide digitized scenarios that portray the "event impacts" associated with various planned or unplanned activities such as the development of a
3 | 39
Many of the properties targeted for potential future development lie adjacent to existing private property and although numerous Verde Valley residents often express a desire to maintain the present boundaries of the National Forests, it is this proximity of private and public lands that also generates problems.
The fact that the vast majority of land in the Verde Valley is in the public domain raises concerns among local residents and presents challenges to local officials about future uses of these lands. Many of the properties targeted for potential future development lie adjacent to existing private property and although numerous Verde Valley residents often express a desire to maintain the present boundaries of the National Forests, it is this proximity of private and public lands that also generates problems. The 2002 Sedona Community Plan aptly points out that as people seek to live adjacent to National Forest properties, this also brings about new utility corridors, roads, and fences as well as increased parties, littering, and inappropriate and unintended uses of the land. The very process of private property development adjacent to the forest lands diminishes the value of the forest landholdings. This results from the mandate that the National Forest manage its lands for "wildland" character. Once people use these lands for their private recreation and open space, wildland character diminishes, and makes these national forest properties candidates for future land exchange. The Sedona Plan highlights the need for careful planning and the development of buffer zones and identifiable trail access points to
minimize the negative aspects associated with private development adjacent to the National Forests (Sedona Community Plan, December 10, 2002. Pages 9-12 and 9-13). In April 2003, Arizona Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl introduced legislation under the name of The Northern Arizona National Forest Land Exchange Act that proposes to incorporate approximately 35,000 acres of forest and range lands owned by Yavapai Ranch into the Prescott National Forest. In return, "lower-elevation grazing lands and other federal lands in the communities of Flagstaff, Williams, Clarkdale, Cottonwood, and Camp Verde would be exchanged to Yavapai Ranch. These communities and six different camps plan to purchase portions of these parcels from Yavapai Ranch." (Press Release, U.S. Senator John McCain. April 11, 2003). The Prescott National Forest would acquire a combination of forestland and grassland property adjacent to the Juniper Mesa Wilderness Area near Seligman. In exchange, Yavapai Ranch would receive approximately 15,000 acres of grazing lands and more than 5,800 acres elsewhere in Yavapai and Coconino counties, including land located within the Verde Valley. The land exchange would consolidate property holdings and alleviate many of the
3 | 40
2004 Verde Valley Forum
problems associated with the development of property adjacent to public lands; however, controversy has arisen over the proposed land trade particularly related to water usage and it future availability as well as the potential impact on the Verde River associated with additional homes and business activity in the region. Alternatively, the newly acquired private lands would be added to the tax base and will generate additional tax revenue for the region's communities. Portions of these land areas have also been considered for view shed protection, housing market diversification and an emergency center fire station in Camp Verde. In addition to the federal lands, the Verde Valley also contains just under 20 sections of State Trust Land. These lands are managed by the State Land Department and generate revenue for public schools, hospitals, charitable institutions, and eleven other public beneficiaries. Although legislation has made the acquisition of State Trust Lands possible through the Arizona Preserve Initiative (API), most of these lands are presently not for sale given current requirements. Although most of the State Trust Land in the Verde Valley is currently under grazing leases or permits, these properties are located along primary highway
corridors, and provide substantial open space to maintain a buffer between the rapidly developing communities within the region. Acquisition of these properties for development could jeopardize the existing open space in these areas. Thus, although much of the landholdings in the Verde Valley are presently State Trust and National Forest lands, the potential for future development and changes resulting from land sales or exchange is considerable. Change in uses of these properties over time provides another challenge for residents, businesses and governments in the Verde Valley to address the issue of sustainable economic development. It should be noted here that a statewide working group is developing an initiative scheduled to be put before the voters in 2004. That initiative would propose that certain State Trust lands be designated as available for purposes of open space.
Although most of the State Trust Land in the Verde Valley is currently under grazing leases or permits, these properties are located along primary highway corridors, and provide substantial open space to maintain a buffer between the rapidly developing communities within the region.
Possible Build-Out Issues
Questions of sustainability arise if the amount of residential, commercial, and industrial construction begins to absorb the limited amount of developable land. While a comprehensive build-out analysis is beyond the scope of this Report, some of the issues involved are identified. The concept itself is simple: a build-out analysis is a look at the future assuming
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
3 | 41
that all land is developed consistent with current regulations. The United States Environmental Protection Agency lays out the basics of a build-out analysis: First, identify land which cannot be developed. This would include land under public ownership, deed restrictions, utility easements, and natural factors such as wetlands, floodplains, or steep slopes. Second, identify undeveloped land which may be developed. This would include not only undeveloped land on the market (being offered for sale) but also other undeveloped land which, according to current regulations, could be developed. This might include lots which are developable but which are owned by an adjoining and kept vacant to protect a scenic view. Third, identify land which has already been developed. Finally, a more complicated analysis is sometimes included that analyzes the future of partially developed land that could be developed more intensively. For example, residential housing might be on land that is zoned commercial or a lot might be subdivided under current regulation. Thus, what is conceptually simple may be made more difficult in practice depending on the level of detail the analysts pursue. (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Green Communities, How to do a Build-out Analysis. http://www. epa.gov/greenkit/ build_out.html)
3 | 44
2004 Verde Valley Forum
The extent to which the Verde Valley is effectively built out may depend on one's personal perspective as well. A contractor who cannot obtain enough jobs to cover fixed costs and generate an income may consider the area built out even if the analysis shows that not all lots have been developed. A construction equipment and materials supplier may consider the area as essentially built out as sales to contractors begin to fall even though they are still positive. Retirees looking to relocate may consider the area built out if they cannot obtain a house or apartment close by shopping, health care and a senior center even though there are options available at a greater distance away from these amenities. The two maps included here (3-2 and 3-3) show the extent to which the Verde Valley is being developed. Comparing the extent of development in 1960 with 2003 clearly shows that significant construction, mostly residential, has occurred to serve a growing Valley population. Given the population projections presented in this chapter, it is clear that local General Plans must begin to address "build-out" issues through zoning actions, applicable fees, incentives, etc., and that a sustainable economic development strategy must be devised to create jobs in new fields if and as the construction industry becomes less of a driving force in the Valley.
Incorporated Communities in the Region
The Verde Valley is home to five incorporated communities. This section provides descriptive information about these communities that may be useful to Forum participants. The current land area (in square miles) for each community is approximately: Camp Verde: 46.0 Clarkdale: 10.1 Cottonwood: 15.75 Jerome: 0.7 Sedona: 18.6 Net Assessed Valuation (in 2002): Camp Verde: $ 44,741,511 Clarkdale: $ 21,713,733 Cottonwood: $ 68,077,053 Jerome: $ 4,290,601 Sedona: $208,488,721
Table 3-7. Sales Tax Revenues Sales Tax Revenues Fiscal Years July 1999 through June 2003 1998-99 Camp Verde Clarkdale Cottonwood Jerome Sedona 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03
$ 601,881 315,985 5,461,102 291,138 9,408,397
$ 799,323 330,753 5,805,404 331,135 9,924,610
$ 1,340,482 361,529 6,066,539 319,204 10,310,911
$1,367,995 399,591 6,603,951 338,646 10,651,563
$ 1,458,211 429,519 6,341,595 348,594 11,000,953
Source: Arizona Department of Revenue
Revenues in Sedona exceeded $11 million in fiscal (FY) 2003, and are higher than that collected in all of the remaining areas combined. Cottonwood's collections were $6.3 million and Camp Verde collected almost $1.5 million in FY 2003. With a few exceptions, the sales tax collected in each community has increased over time at a steady but significant rate.
Sales Tax Revenues
The growth in sales tax revenues in these communities over the past five years is shown in Table 3-7. The city sales tax rates vary from 2.0 percent in Camp Verde, 2.2 percent in Cottonwood, 2.25 percent in Clarkdale to 3.0 percent in Jerome and Sedona.
Summary
Current trends, projected into the future, create real issues for residents of the Verde Valley. How the current quality of life, especially dependent on the natural beauty of the area, can be maintained and enhanced in the face of demographic pressures is a challenge worthy of the Forum's attention and discussion.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
3 | 45
3 | 46
2004 Verde Valley Forum
4 OPINIONS AND ATTITUDES OF VERDE VALLEY RESIDENTS ON ACHIEVING A SUSTAINABLE, DIVERSIFIED ECONOMY
"We cannot separate a sustainable economy from preservation of our quality of life. The reason a good many of us live up here has to do with fresh air and the availability of fishing and camping and hiking." --Focus Group Participant
4 OPINIONS AND ATTITUDES OF VERDE VALLEY RESIDENTS ON ACHIEVING A SUSTAINABLE, DIVERSIFIED ECONOMY This chapter summarizes the varied opinions and attitudes of five focus groups on the topic Achieving a Sustainable, Diversified Economy in the Verde Valley. The groups were organized around five themes: business, community and educational leaders, elected officials and civic leaders, environmental group leaders, and economic development professionals. Group participants were identified and invited by the Verde Valley Forum Research Committee. Four of the sessions were in Cottonwood at Yavapai College's Small Business Development Center, and one was in a conference room in a small business office in Sedona. A total of 31 persons participated in the five 90-minute sessions. For the purpose of discussion, the research team provided broad definitions of the terms sustainable development and diversified economy. The definition of the first term is from the State of Minnesota statutes and is "Development that maintains or enhances economic opportunity and community well-being while protecting and restoring the natural environment upon which people and economies depend." (See also Chapter 1 for a more complete definition.) The definition of a diversified economy is "one that does not depend on one or a few economic sectors to generate jobs and income; rather, a diversified economy is one in which the services, retail, manufacturing, construction and other sectors play a role." The form showing definitions and questions distributed to the focus groups is included in this Report as Appendix D. The goal of the research team was to listen to Verde Valley opinions and attitudes about sustainable economic development and capture the diversity of ideas for this background research Report. This chapter reflects the dynamic thinking of five groups of people, somewhat but not completely, representative of the region's population. This narrative gives voice to those ideas by including quotes paraphrased from the discussions. Participants' statements are shown in quotations or indented paragraphs.
The goal of the research team was to listen to Verde Valley opinions and attitudes about sustainable economic development and capture the diversity of ideas for this background research Report.
Overview
A sustainable, diversified economy supports a high quality of life in the Verde Valley by not damaging or detracting from the region's natural beauty. It should also support a higher quality of life in the Verde
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
4 | 49
Valley by creating and sustaining more jobs offering livable wages and career opportunities than now exist.
To each of these groups quality of life has different meanings in planning for economic development.
It would seem to me that we cannot separate a sustainable economy from preservation of our quality of life. The reason a good many of us live up here has to do with fresh air and the availability of fishing and camping and hiking. High quality of life is a widely shared value among focus group participants. It embraces both the rich natural environment and human standards of living. Once past this broad definition, however, differences emerge in how to measure high quality of life, how to balance the environment and the economy, how to pursue jobs, and in other areas. Economic development is conducted to benefit people, and because of people it is a complex, challenging venture. A question emerging from the transcripts of the five focus group meetings is "Who is economic development for in the Verde Valley? Is it the retiree population, who bring resources of time, energy, and talent while requiring housing and the amenities of culture, recreation, and health care? Is it the working professional raising a family and needing career opportunities, affordable housing, and quality schools? Is it the manual skills
worker, perhaps a migrant, needing higher wages, more secure employment, affordable housing, and educational opportunities?" To each of these groups quality of life has different meanings in planning for economic development. "Differences in ideas how we should grow" is a complex challenge for elected officials, community planners, and citizens of the region. Are we creating jobs for needy people in the Verde Valley or creating jobs to bring in people from New York?
A Sustainable, Diversified Economy in the Verde Valley
Focus group participants were asked the question "What does a sustainable, diversified economy in the Verde Valley mean to you?" to begin to define and describe the issue. The following response illustrates how many people place economic development in the context of the Verde Valley's exceptional quality of life. What is it we really want as human beings in the Verde Valley? Why are we here? Is it because we want to get rich? If I wanted a better job I'd move to Phoenix. The reason I live here, the reason that most of us live here, is we
4 | 50
2004 Verde Valley Forum
like the space, the scenery, the quiet; we like to go fly fishing or whatever. The statement also expresses how a large number of Verde Valley residents have moved here for quality of life, not for jobs. This is true for much of the large retiree population. Diversification means the Verde Valley needs to grow its economic bases. The hospital and health care services sector that capitalizes on the region's retiree population is one road to diversification. Diversity means to me a number of different kinds of business manufacturing and retail and construction. Our hospital is a good base for our economy.
In Sedona 98 percent of what comes in is leisure and leisure travelers are so up and down and so diverse they don't spend as much as if you have some kind of conference facility where you can host larger business groups. That's where the money in tourism is. You need to recognize that tourism is what's feeding the economy. We've got a real Mecca here in terms of tourism. Probably within a twentymile radius you'll not find as many things for a tourist to see and do as anywhere in the country. One of those things is bird watching. Ecotourism is one way to develop and diversify the tourism sector. The Verde Valley Birding Festival was mentioned as a successful attraction already in place. Several people said the region could be more actively marketed as an ecotourism destination.
One reason people want the economy to diversify beyond tourism is the proliferation of low wage service jobs in the industry. Another viewpoint is that tourism is in place now, the region will always attract visitors, and tourism can and should be further developed and diversified.
Tourism
Views about tourism's role in the Verde Valley are mixed. It is acknowledged that tourism is a dominant sector in the region, but people do not agree on whether that is good for the economy. One reason people want the economy to diversify beyond tourism is the proliferation of low wage service jobs in the industry. Another viewpoint is that tourism is in place now, the region will always attract visitors, and tourism can and should be further developed and diversified.
Strengths in Achieving a Sustainable, Diversified Economy
The Verde Valley's strengths for achieving a sustainable, diversified economy can be broadly categorized into two areas: human resources and the natural environment. Two organizations, Yavapai College and the Verde Valley Medical Center, are also recognized as assets to the economy.
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
Image contributed by "Beach's On Location" Cottonwood, Arizona www.beachonlocation.com
4 | 51
Yavapai College is a strength because of its programs addressing workforce development and small business training, in particular the Northern Arizona Regional Skills Center and the Small Business Development Center. The medical center generates jobs while providing health care services to the community. Those services help attract people and new businesses to the region.
Despite positive feelings about the region's residents, the focus group discussants revealed a more complex reality in the Verde Valley's communities. For example, the contributions of the large retiree population were strongly applauded: "We have a high population of intelligent, energetic, and creative retired folk. We need to build on that." Besides contributing civic resources, retired people are also a major economic force in the Valley. That's a great group because they don't require jobs. They have assets and brain power and skills and they are a consumer for products that can be produced here but don't require jobs on the other end. You've got money that is available that doesn't require jobs. Not everyone agreed, however, that the economic and civic resource in the retiree population is a completely positive influence. One person said "the population that is making money somewhere else may be the biggest obstacle to economic development here in the Valley" because they are not dependent on the regional economy for their livelihood. Also, although the civic contributions of the retiree population are valuable, they stand in the way of younger people becoming involved and providing leadership.
Human Resources
The people of the Verde Valley are its greatest strength according to many focus group participants for a number of reasons: the contributions of the retiree population, the potential of the region's youth, the rich diversity of the population, an active citizenry, and the workforce.
The region's "committed citizenry" and "astounding talent on boards and commissions" are major strengths with the potential to bring about change and provide leadership.
It's people who are passionate about the quality of life, about the clean air, that come back here and want to give back. The region's "committed citizenry" and "astounding talent on boards and commissions" are major strengths with the potential to bring about change and provide leadership.
4 | 52
2004 Verde Valley Forum
Those [retired] resources are here and obviously it would be smart to utilize that but I think that the future and the sustainability is in the hands of the youth. And as long as we have old people interested, like us, the economy is not being run by young educated go-getters, and we are always going to be a retirement community and have a service industry for tourism. The Verde Valley retiree population is an enormous asset to the region, but economic dependence on this group is one way to limit economic diversification.
I hope that we appreciate the fact that we have this river in the desert and I think that we take it for granted. I would like to see our communities and businesses recognize it. But wow, what would we be without this river? Developing local agricultural production would help diversify the economy while promoting a sustainable industry. The region should consider creating an agricultural zone for open space designation and along the river corridor.
The Verde Valley retiree population is an enormous asset to the region, but economic dependence on this group is one way to limit economic diversification.
The Planning Opportunity
The opportunity for planning is an important strength for the Verde Valley. I think the greatest strength that the Verde Valley has is we are at such a crucial point to grow and we have this opportunity to be very innovative in our thinking in terms of what sort of community that we want to create. We have been involved with some rezoning issues and our landscape architects came up with the idea of a community center and having a safe place for pedestrians to walk and that is what people are really drawn to, locals and tourists alike. Meanwhile, others thought that Verde Valley communities have already taken
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
Natural Environment
The natural environment of the Verde Valley its beauty, recreational and cultural amenities, and climate are perceived as an economic strength because the environment attracts people to the area to live or to visit. Several people noted the environment's attractions could help recruit businesses to the region. Other features of the environment with economic attributes were the Verde River and high quality agricultural land. The Verde River is a defining feature for the Valley that has been underutilized in establishing a regional identity.
4 | 53
steps toward regional planning and that this is a very positive indicator for economic development. The Valley Academy for Career and Technical Education is an example of communities pooling resources to benefit the larger community. Open space and transportation planning on the regional level are other examples of regional cooperation. Focus group participants thought these cooperative initiatives establish a precedent for regional economic planning. We have all kinds of opportunity to be creative and innovative instead of going about it in a very traditional way and think about the number of jobs regardless of the downside of that industry or that job... We are looking at this regionally instead of just in single communities. We have finally matured to the point where we understand that when one community makes a choice it impacts all of us. Focus group participants were very positive about communities working together and saw the Verde Valley Forum as a good step for the region.
The People Factor
This narrative has already described how the people factor and human resource issues are complicated. Although the Verde Valley's people resource is considered by many to be the region's greatest asset, people also cause problems. One issue is because of attitude, another is diversity of the population, and the third issue relates to the workforce. Throughout the focus group discussions, many participants were pleased with the region's steps towards planning ahead. One of the obstacles to planning, however, is that in many communities there is a "provincial attitude," and "a mindset resistant to change." We still have a strong Wild West, we don't want any rules or laws in the small communities, and it's a real drag and a burden to come up with progressive zoning and other types of guidance that lead to communities that are well planned and attractive to people who will start businesses. Meanwhile, diversity of the population causes challenges to achieving consensus in communities and the region. The region's diverse population includes newcomers and old-timers affluent retirees, low-wage workers, descendents of miners from
Obstacles and Challenges Facing the Verde Valley
Obstacles and challenges to achieving a sustainable, diversified economy in the Verde Valley are categorized into three broad groups: people, infrastructure, and water.
4 | 54
2004 Verde Valley Forum
Jerome, and fourth and fifth generation ranching families a mix of backgrounds, dreams, resources, and experiences. ... the diversity of the population, and all the things that we were complimenting ourselves with that [diversity], are also truly obstacles... it's harder to get a shared vision. It's easier to get a vision with ranchers than with ranchers and farmers and then you bring in tourism... The region's dependence on the retiree population for civic contributions, economic resources, and political leadership is a challenge akin to the diversity issue. As discussed earlier, the retiree demographic is not representative of the region's population and broader economic needs. The Verde Valley must engage a wider spectrum of its population, especially its youth, in its leadership pool and generate new resources for economic development. The last component of the "people factor" is workforce issues. On one hand, low wage jobs in the tourism and service sectors create a vulnerable population of citizens who lack job security and decent housing. Many of these workers are undocumented workers. And so they take a number of jobs in the service industry, particularly
hotels, landscaping, and things like that that other people won't take. And they compose a major force of the major part of the workforce. One person felt that the region's abundance of low wage jobs is a major economic and social problem for the Verde Valley. He cites the impact of big-box chains as a negative for the workforce. One of the greatest obstacles is the coming in of these chains.... For example, Wal-Mart, which is a huge corporation in the U.S. They like to pay their workers seven dollars an hour or less. Consequently, it puts a group of people in a difficult position because they literally cannot afford to live in an apartment. They can't afford to have a car and take care of their kids. We then have a group of people that literally struggle all the time to survive. I don't think any one would want that kind of an environment in the Verde Valley. Another issue in the workforce is unpreparedness of the youth. One person works with a program to help youth understand they have broader career choices. We are especially focused on kids who are near graduation or who are seniors in high school. When we ask what are
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
The Verde Valley must engage a wider spectrum of its population, especially its youth, in its leadership pool and generate new resources for economic development.
4 | 55
you willing to do they say, well, work in the hotels, work at McDonald's, or work in restaurants. One person said "... half of our population is not prepared for jobs in certain industries" because a large percentage of our students don't finish high school. Mentorship programs for youth are a way to help youth prepare for careers. Unfortunately, the perceived weakness in the workforce is a challenge for business recruitment. Employers are concerned about coming here because they don't see a workforce. They don't see that there are enough quality people to draw from. Our quality people tend to be older retirees or younger retirees in their fifties and sixties. They're wonderful educated people but the young people who want to work are not terribly educated and have a lack of a work ethic. This is starting to be addressed through Valley Academy and Mingus.
range from kids unable to ride bikes safely in the neighborhood to workers needing to commute between Verde Valley communities. There is a scarcity of things to do like go to the movies or shop, so Verde Valley residents often travel to Flagstaff, Prescott, or Phoenix. Telecommunications infrastructure, like wireless internet, is not as strong as it could be. The lack of regional media means the region lacks a communication network. Although communities have their own newspapers, it is difficult to find out what's happening in another Verde Valley community without reading its own newspaper. Consequently, cultural activities in Cottonwood are hard to promote in Sedona and vice versa. Infrastructure issues are a challenge in recruiting new business to the area. All these issues also concern many current residents of the Verde Valley. Many would like to see better public transit, a regional newspaper, more planning for sewer systems in unincorporated areas. Several focus group participants said big-box stores like WalMart are important to the local economy by offering a place to shop for inexpensive consumer goods.
Infrastructure issues are a challenge in recruiting new business to the area.
Infrastructure
Infrastructure issues affect all areas of the Verde Valley. A lack of affordable housing is a problem in some communities more than in others. Transportation issues
2004 Verde Valley Forum
Water, Water, and Water
In the high desert of the Verde Valley, water is limited. People are concerned their
4 | 56
water is going to California, to Phoenix, or to Prescott. The availability of water is an overriding need in any kind of planning in the Verde Valley. The 300-pound gorilla in the room is water issues. We don't have good coordinated planning. We don't understand what water is available. "Not believing we have water issues" is one opinion. Not knowing how much water is available due to a lack of scientific data is another problem. We don't know what the sustainable population of the Valley is relative to the water that we can support for the next 100 years." The need for more scientific research to better understand the region's water availability was addressed in several focus groups.
Small Business Development
Small business development cuts across many of the issues discussed in the focus groups. As a strategy for Verde Valley economic development, it accomplishes several different goals. Small business can be sustainable, and an array of small businesses can help diversify the economy. Small business can capitalize on the region's tourism industry, and can help diversify the industry through ecotourism. Small business could also take the lead in developing the Valley's agricultural base. The Internet offers much untapped potential for business development in rural areas. Because of the internet, marketing possibilities for entrepreneurship reach a much broader market... As we know, small business drives a lot of the economy so I think it's a really important topic. It is very sustainable. There is widespread anecdotal knowledge about telecommuters in the Verde Valley. People knew of home-based occupations like technical writing, investing, and various types of consulting. The potential of these
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
The availability of water is an overriding need in any kind of planning in the Verde Valley. "The 300-pound gorilla in the room is water issues. We don't have good coordinated planning. We don't understand what water is available."
How to Make It Happen
Ideas about how to achieve a sustainable, diversified development in the Verde Valley are discussed in the following two areas: small business development and regional marketing. Ideas about the importance of building a regional identity and taking a regional approach are also discussed.
Small business can be sustainable, and an array of small businesses can help diversify the economy.
4 | 57
The uncertain quality of the Valley's telecommunications infrastructure is another constraint to developing the internet as a small business tool.
home-based "underground" businesses as factors in economic development is limited because not much is known about them so they are largely uncategorized in the region's business community. The uncertain quality of the Valley's telecommunications infrastructure is another constraint to developing the internet as a small business tool. For example, wireless internet is not available throughout the region. Yavapai College is viewed as a champion of small business. The Small Business Development Center (SBDC) is a strong ally of small business. The SBDC's partnership with the Yavapai-Apache Nation is a good example of building partnerships to promote business development in the Verde Valley.
I don't think that we have to go outside. I think that we need to look at the inside first. We see truck after truck after truck going to the landfill... what a marvelous opportunity we have over there to save the useable land and keep from polluting it so much and simply reusing. Besides reusing materials or building green recycling, one person said business opportunities are in place using locally available raw materials: Can we produce it here? Can we make it here? Can we use natural materials? I think of adobe houses that are built out of natural material dug out of the ground. There are fake adobelooking houses that have frames and installation and everything else... But the real test is to draw a line around the Valley and say okay, how much is consumed here. What are our needs for food, electricity, shelter, water, fuel, and so on? See how much we can produce here.
There was a question about how to encourage more entrepreneurial activity in the Verde Valley as an economic development strategy. One way is to continue to support the services provided by the SBDC and the college's Regional Skills Center.
There was a question about how to encourage more entrepreneurial activity in the Verde Valley as an economic development strategy. One way is to continue to support the services provided by the SBDC and the college's Regional Skills Center. Another approach is to offer more programs about starting a home-based business. Small business development as an approach to sustainable diversified economic development supports the view that the Verde Valley should develop from within rather than look outside to bring in new companies.
2004 Verde Valley Forum
Marketing the Region
Focus group participants also felt that the region needed to market itself and recruit businesses to the Verde Valley. One way to make this happen is to establish a regional marketing association. The association could target clean businesses or organizations.
4 | 58
I'm looking at a Verde Valley marketing association that goes out and seeks the relocation of Sierra Club or Sustainable Earth organizations. You go out and target certain disciplines, maybe through land availability... I think the Verde Valley community is going to have to bind together, Cottonwood, Camp Verde, Sedona and say here is some land that fits into our community plan and where you can put some small businesses and office buildings that house internet companies or something like that. The communities of the region should support the association cooperatively, and the business community should be involved as well. A specific suggestion was to re-create the Verde Valley Regional Economic Development group because "it's already there." A strong topic throughout the discussion of attracting businesses to the region was the question of amenities. What does the Verde Valley offer businesses seeking a location here? There are many concerns about the ability of the Valley to offer attractive amenities. As discussed earlier, workforce quality is an issue, particularly in attracting the high wage, clean industries the Verde Valley chooses to target. Low test scores in local schools is also a negative.
Various infrastructure issues, including housing, water, telecommunications, sewer, and transportation must be resolved. The community does not offer a lot of amenities for social and consumer activities that business leaders and their families could require. Finally, some Valley communities are not prepared to offer quality locations for business or housing. How does a government attract business? You can go out there all day long and make offers, but businesses come here and drive around and see old cars, unkempt fences, and garbage. They're not going to be attracted. I always say that the town should consider itself a person interviewing for a job. There are things that towns need to do to have a neat appearance, to have zoning and planning to protect land values. It is clear that as a region, and as respective communities, the Verde Valley must address the tangible and intangible amenities it offers to relocating businesses.
It is clear that as a region, and as respective communities, the Verde Valley must address the tangible and intangible amenities it offers to relocating businesses.
Regional Planning and Regional Identity
Throughout the focus groups, regional planning was mentioned again and again as a strategy for regional economic development. The Focused Future planning
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
4 | 59
programs in Sedona and Cottonwood were popular and effective in helping those communities. People also said the transition of the Sedona Academy to a Verde Valley perspective is an important step forward. There is concern that Verde Valley communities need to develop more community spirit and a regional identity. Local activities and events need to be promoted regionally. Promote Verde River Days and Fort Verde Days in Sedona. Promote Sedona events in Camp Verde. These types of shared activities will help foster community spirit throughout the Verde Valley and build connections among the different communities. A regional newspaper would also help regional communication and build regional identity. People also said communities must be able to plan for water development and use. We certainly need some kind of water policy here so that developers don't build without any regard to what the water resources are. We have no control over what goes on and anyone can get a permit and a well if they want to, including a developer. It would be nice if that could be changed in some way so that it could be controlled.
There is a strong feeling that local communities do not have enough knowledge about, or control of, local water issues. One person said the region needed a local governing body for water. A final thought on regional planning is to diversify the people doing the planning. For instance, community involvement in forums should be broadened. I would also say that maybe create forums for people other than old white guys to sit around and debate this. An old white guy's view is one view and it may not be the best or the one that is going to move us forward.
4 | 60
2004 Verde Valley Forum
5 VISIONING FOR THE FUTURE
It is primarily in the area of policies for community and economic development that the Verde Valley is challenged like much of rural America and rural Arizona.
5 | 19
5 VISIONING FOR THE FUTURE "Significant portions of rural America are in trouble. For some parts of rural America, the slow slide to no longer being viable economically, socially, or politically is within sight. At the same time, without intending it, we are headed back to a rural America of the rich and the poor of resorts and pockets of persistent poverty. Yet most current rural policies do not meet the needs of rural people and communities; they are designed for the past, not the future."
-- Karl N. Stauber, president, Northwest Area Foundation Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Vol. 86, No. 2, Second Quarter 2001
Over and over in the focus groups held to inform this Report, Verde Valley residents asserted that they did not want to "be like Phoenix" but wished for better employment opportunities and amenities.
Stauber's observations regarding rural America are distressing for two reasons: first, for their bleak assessment of the state of rural America today and second, for their negative view of the current, but outdated, rural policy mix. While some parts of rural Arizona are accurate examples of the depressing situation that Stauber describes, the Verde Valley does not fall neatly into his characterization of troubled rural America. As we've seen earlier in this Report, the Valley's population is growing, incomes are rising and the economy has real bright spots. Yet the Valley does have its rich and its poor, its resorts and its poverty. It is primarily in the area of policies for community and economic development that the Verde Valley is challenged like much of rural America and rural Arizona.
The Rural Setting
Public officials and private citizens alike in Arizona's rural communities desire to preserve or enhance their region's quality of life while cultivating a higher standard of living for rural residents. Over and over in the focus groups held to inform this Report, Verde Valley residents asserted that they did not want to "be like Phoenix" but wished for better employment opportunities and amenities. Even where rural population is growing, as in the Verde Valley, urban populations often outpace this growth and improvements in education, transportation, and telecommunication infrastructures do not reach the rural communities. And even where the rural populations grow, the best
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
As we've seen earlier in this Report, the Valley's population is growing, incomes are rising and the economy has real bright spots. Yet the Valley does have its rich and its poor, its resorts and its poverty. It is primarily in the area of policies for community and economic development that the Verde Valley is challenged like much of rural America and rural Arizona.
5 | 63
educated young people still migrate to the cities and rural wage rates are lower than in the urban setting for similar work.
An active and aggressive economic development program in this kind of setting is not necessarily a program for economic growth per se; rather, it often becomes a program to cushion the employment losses that would otherwise occur a program to help "stay even."
Too often, these units of government move from fiscal crisis to fiscal crisis without the capability of developing longer-term strategies or influencing policy significantly at the state level through a coordinated and sustained effort.
Providing public services to a substantial, rapidly growing rural population dispersed over a large geographic area is often a struggle especially where large capital investments are required as in the case of roads, water, and sewage services. There is a continuing challenge in creating hightechnology, high-paying jobs just to replace those lost through high productivity increase (agriculture), technological change (utilities), or regulatory revision (financial institutions). An active and aggressive economic development program in this kind of setting is not necessarily a program for economic growth per se; rather, it often becomes a program to cushion the employment losses that would otherwise occur a program to help "stay even." When these challenges are combined, they severely limit the fiscal abilities of local, county, and regional governmental entities to be creative, proactive, and vibrant in anticipating and meeting the demands of their citizens. Too often, these units of government move from fiscal crisis to fiscal crisis without the capability of developing longer-term strategies or influencing policy significantly at the state level through a
2004 Verde Valley Forum
coordinated and sustained effort. They are too often just trying to deal with problems or mandates thrust upon them from the outside. The Rocky Mountain Institute observes, "Whatever the cause of the influx, rapid expansion more than about a 2 percent annual increase in population generally brings more harm than good. Communities can't seem to keep ahead of problems created by expansion of this rate. Before one problem can be defined and solved, another arises, then another. They pile up and complicate one another. Local leaders are overwhelmed." (Economic Renewal Guide, p. 4)
More Evidence
Since 1962, leading citizens from the state have convened to discuss and make recommendations on issues confronting Arizona through the Arizona Town Hall. Town Hall reports are instructive in that they often contain observations or recommendations that reflect the unique challenges the rural areas face in terms of the topic of that particular Town Hall. In May 1998, the Arizona Town Hall topic was Meeting the Challenges and Opportunities of Arizona's Growing Senior Population. The Report indicated, "Older rural people, by almost all economic, health, and social
5 | 64
indicators, are poorer and less healthy, have less adequate housing and fewer options in personal and public transportation, and have significantly greater problems with access to health professionals and community-based programs and services." In May 1999, the topic was Uniting a Diverse Arizona. Among the observations in that Report were, "...many outlying areas...cannot access the Internet. In turn, schools lack the resources to offer newer technologies to rural students..." Also, "There has been a movement from rural jobs to urban jobs caused by the fact that families are less able to sustain their livelihoods from natural-resource industries, farming, ranching, timber and mining...At the same time, there is a counter-movement of affluent urban dwellers acquiring homes in rural areas. Such a movement puts a strain on the existing infrastructure of the affected communities and affects local economic and social structures." In May 2001, the topic was Moving All of Arizona into the 21st Century Economy. The Town Hall Report observed, "The ability of rural Arizona to grow is influenced by limitations inherent in existing transportation and communications infrastructure systems. Inadequate roadways make it difficult to get
products and people in and out of rural communities...The lack of broadband telecommunication access also is a serious impediment to rural Arizona's economic growth. Rural communities have difficulty funding infrastructure improvements as a result of the shift in funding mechanisms from federal and state grants to loan programs. Rural areas also lack funds necessary to compete with urban areas in providing incentives to attract businesses. In addition to basic financial limitations, political limitations also frequently prevent raising local taxes to fund such improvements." In October 2001, the topic was Pieces of Power: Governance in Arizona. The Report observes, "The role of county government must be enhanced and modernized to enable them to provide regional solutions, particularly between municipalities. Alternatively, existing regional structures... should be reviewed to determine whether they have a functional role in regional problem solving."
It Could Be Worse Much Worse
With its population down to the 2,000 level that is often considered the threshold for a functioning regional center, Superior [Nebraska], the anchor of Nuckolls County, has vowed it will not catch the death chill of nearby Hardy. But the town's struggle to stay alive shows how even with the best of civic intentions, it is difficult to fight forces that have humbled much of rural America. People here taxed themselves to create an economic development fund. They put in a fiber-optic network for telecommunications...They zoned 30 acres at the edge of town for industrial use, graded it and put in utilities. At the center of the proposed industrial park sits the empty shell of a brand new building...Just outside of town is a paved and well-lighted runway, although only a lone crop duster, flipped in a storm, rests upsidedown on the tarmac... They put together a PowerPoint presentation, boasting of a union-free labor force in a town where a solid three-bedroom, two-bath home sells for less than $50,000... And so they wait for jobs, for business, for a future.
THE NEW YORK TIMES, December 1, 2003, p. A18.
Assumptions and Values
Many of these kinds of challenges were discussed in the focus groups informing this Report. As noted in Chapter 4, we found that there are remarkable shared values across the communities of the Verde Valley
Achieving a Sustainable and Diversified Economy
5 | 65
HERE THEY COME! ...Americans are once again on the move, this time in a migration that pushes growth even farther into the countryside. Increasing numbers of people are fleeing the suburbs and choosing to live in the small towns and open spaces surrounding America's magnificent national and state parks, wildlife refuges, forests, historic sites, wilderness areas, and other public lands. Gateway communities the towns and cities that border these public lands are the destinations of choice for much of the country's migrating populace...gateway communities offer what an increasing number of Americans value: a clean environment, safe streets, and a friendly small-town atmosphere. But just as in the suburbs, unplanned growth and rapid development in gateway communities can create the same social ills from which many Americans are now fleeing.
-- Jim Howe, Ed McMahon, and Luther Propst, Balancing Nature and Commerce in Gateway Communities, Island Press, 1997, pp. 1, 3. 5 | 66
and across groups with particular interests, such as education, business, and community development. In the focus groups, common themes appeared throughout. Participants in all five groups agreed that the clearest strength of the region is its people. The most widely held value in addressing the challenge of sustainable development is the Verde Valley's quality of life. Similarly, there are commonly held assumptions. Most important is that the region will continue to grow in population and that water will be an increasingly important issue in the future. It is really not surprising that there is this commonality of assumptions and values across the Verde Valley. For the most part, individuals have made the voluntary choice to live here. Another observation of participants in the focus groups was that if they were looking to maximize their own income and personal wealth, they simply wouldn't be here; they would be in Phoenix or some other metropolitan area. If there are these common assumptions and values in the Valley, then why do we need to go any further in this inquiry? That is, if we all essentially agree on our assessment of the state of the Ve